[M3devel] target naming again..DJGPP?

[Jay]

Does anyone else find the idea of a DJGPP port "interesting"?
 
I think I'll go ahead and do it. I know its useless but I find it "interesting".A few things will come before it.
 
The DJGPP runtime appears to have the adequate support for alarm/setitimer,so it /should/ be fairly easy.I've already demonstrated to myself cooperating threading, and alarm/setitimer
can be used for preemption, with the user posix threads.
The easy work I did pruning down NT386GNU's *.i3 file to a minimum will be useful.
 
What to call it?
 
Some combination of
 
(x86 or 386 or i386) and (DOS or MSDOS) and (DJGPP and/or GNU)?
 
 DJGPP  MSDOS  X86_MSDOS  X86_DJGPP  X86_MSDOS_DJGPP  X86_MSDOS_DJGPP_GNU   X86_MSDOS_GNU 
 
It really is reasonable to have a quadruple sometimes. architecture-operatingsystem-C runtime-toolset 
though C runtime doesn't very often.
 
?I don't want to open the whole can of worms, just need a name for DJGPP.
 
DJGPP and MSDOS are fairly unambiguous here..but...Open Watcom is also a viable runtime/toolset.Maybe fit into the naming.
 X86_MSDOS_WATCOM  X86_MSDOS_GNU  X86_MSDOS_DJGPP  
 
Open Watcom really puts a monkey wrench into it.X86_OPENWATCOM is among the most ambiguous hypothetical names, because OpenWatcom targetsa bajillion x86 variants (and even made progress toward Alpha and PowerPC).Open Watcom is actively developed and targets at least: 16 bit real mode MS-DOS 32 bit protected mode MS-DOS  16 bit Windows 3.1 (enhanced mode?)  32 bit code in 16 bit Windows  32 bit protected mode Windows (NT)  32 bit protected mode OS/2   other OS/2 variants? 16 bit? Or only 16 bit?  Novell Netware I believe!  x86 Linux
or just DJGPP MSDOS_OPENWATCOM 
or
 MSDOS_DJGPP MSDOS_OPENWATCOM 
MSDOS implies 32 bit x86. ?
 
 
PERHAPS some more names should be settled for some actual practical targets that might come up soon, to guide the discussion? 
 
 X86_SOLARIS ? 
 AMD64_SOLARIS ? 
 SPARC64_SOLARIS ?
Solaris always has two toolsets though, ? Sun and GNU?
  AMD64_DARWIN ? 
  PPC64_DARWIN ? (obsolete before it ever caught on?) 
  PPC64_AIX ? (this exists as an OS, right?) 
 AMD64_NT -- ambiguous ? 
 AMD64_NT_GNU ? 
 AMD64_NT_MINGNU ? -- this toolset is already out there  
 AMD64_NT_CYGWIN ? -- This isn't likely, Cygwin is very x86-specific 
 AMD64_LINUX ? 
 IA64_VMS ?
 IA64_LINUX ?
   two or more toolsets, right?  GCC, Intel, SGI?
  IA64_LINUX_GNU  ?
  IA64_LINUX_INTEL  ?
  IA64_LINUX_SGI  ?
 
 
I'm skeptical there will be any IA64 ports, but I expect there will be AMD64.
(I have seen IA64 for around $500 on eBay, tempting, for a port..)
 
 
And consider LLVM in the naming exercise? As a toolset, right?
  AMD64_LINUX_GNU 
  AMD64_LINUX_LLVM ? 
 
Are people wedded to "I386" instead of "x86"?
To indicate clearly it isn't 286 and the ilk?
 
I am somewhat wedded to "AMD64", though other names include "X64" and X86-64.
X86-64 is too long, and the dash would probably go away, X8664, getting to be a long run of gibberish numbers.
X64...is that less than X86? :)
AMD64 is the value of %PROCESSOR_ARCHITECTURE% on NT and the install directory name on the pre-Vista CDs (along with i386), and it is available as an #ifdef (_AMD64_, _M_AMD64).
 
 
Intel was calling it EM64T, but that gone away in favor of Intel64, to not be confused with IA64, which is Itanium, stands for Intel Architecture 64 hm...
Intel64 != Intel Architecture 64.
Admittedly they were kind of stuck.
 
 
 - Jay
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://m3lists.elegosoft.com/pipermail/m3devel/attachments/20080329/abc4a165/attachment-0001.html>