| Re: [eigen] Building eigen in non x86/amd64/ppc archs |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
]
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] Building eigen in non x86/amd64/ppc archs
- From: Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2010 02:24:22 -0500
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=nuRGmYzO7Hup1GV9TLIs41PdGH/PU0Og7HjCgVxxV0Q=; b=Qsj4HnCt2JzjV590zJlQfP2nEwVI1pGygMsFSwiP5S0XF6LjDmyUPlNP9uBPjhPMIa /cjp+ePYR7sRveYq4tREIL4lxonDLu9VKitqjk1l1EITKdkGivCTNRhxbZidkIy+M8Ar +uA0Nen+AoV5dPnCc+yuB9fwTnqaEtA0cgFwY=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Gh6f23nKwCV8xYA3lebe0kAak8ZO9O1WpzxJTI3sElLxa7NDqNhgi8K3EhO7cET5sb fAeZyCrUSTI5jZrjULH2r9iyKB725g/wnIJ42grjAYH4e1TdihJC6lrvqaZtgQZQ7Nev fyVdjzCQqae50cTde4TkfG8yAaae/4TsvnTtk=
2010/12/27 Thomas Capricelli <orzel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Yes, definitely. I've checked here (echo|gcc -dM -E -x c -|sort|less) and
> inded __i386__
Yes so you need to do a positive check for either __i386__ or __x86_64__.
Moreover, be very careful that MSVC uses different preprocessor
symbols than other compilers do. Checks that potentially are done with
MSVC need to be aware of that.
In any case, for features that are specific to one or two platforms, a
positive check is much better than a negative check against all other
platforms.
Benoit
is not defined on amd64, so your modification is needed. I'll
> commit in ~24 hours unless something else pops up. Thanks!
>
> ++
>
> Thomas
>
> --
>
> Thomas Capricelli <orzel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> http://www.freehackers.org/thomas
>
> On Monday 27 December 2010 22:08:08 Jose Luis Blanco wrote:
>
>> Yes, a list of positive checks is clearly a better solution.
>
>> But, wouldn't amd64 be also included (it seems __i386__ is not defined
>
>> in amd64 archs)?? [1]