Is there a way to change what is compiled in based on whether the -m32 or -m64
option is chosen? I can see that there are predefined versions (for X86 and
X86_64 e.g.), but I don't know if this is based on the compile options, or the
platform the compilation is being performed on. As an example, if I am
compiling on a 64-bit intel machine, is the version X86 or X86_64 set by default?
Thanks.

On Monday, 26 December 2011 at 05:41:11 UTC, Nathan Coe wrote:
> As an example, if I am compiling on a 64-bit intel machine, is the version X86 or X86_64 set by default?

The predefined version identifiers specify the *target* architecture.

Note that the default target architecture matches the architecture of the compiler binary: the 64-bit DMD compiler has -m64 by default (use -m32 to override).

http://dlang.org/version.html#PredefinedVersions lists predefined version identifiers.

On 26-12-2011 06:41, Nathan Coe wrote:
> Is there a way to change what is compiled in based on whether the -m32 or -m64
> option is chosen? I can see that there are predefined versions (for X86 and
> X86_64 e.g.), but I don't know if this is based on the compile options, or the
> platform the compilation is being performed on. As an example, if I am
> compiling on a 64-bit intel machine, is the version X86 or X86_64 set by default?
> Thanks.

Use:

version (D_LP64)
{
    // 64-bit ...
}
else
{
    // 32-bit ...
}

Always avoid using architecture identifiers to figure out bitness. There were plenty of cases of this in druntime and phobos which made portability very annoying (they are fixed now, though).

- Alex

On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 3:53 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen <xtzgzorex@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 26-12-2011 06:41, Nathan Coe wrote:
>>
>> Is there a way to change what is compiled in based on whether the -m32 or
>> -m64
>> option is chosen? I can see that there are predefined versions (for X86
>> and
>> X86_64 e.g.), but I don't know if this is based on the compile options, or
>> the
>> platform the compilation is being performed on. As an example, if I am
>> compiling on a 64-bit intel machine, is the version X86 or X86_64 set by
>> default?
>> Thanks.
>
>
> Use:
>
> version (D_LP64)
> {
>    // 64-bit ...
> }
> else
> {
>    // 32-bit ...
> }
>
> Always avoid using architecture identifiers to figure out bitness. There were plenty of cases of this in druntime and phobos which made portability very annoying (they are fixed now, though).
>

+1
This makes things like, say, running code on ARM much much simpler. If
you don't actually need X86, don't require it.

On 12/26/11, Alex Rønne Petersen <xtzgzorex@gmail.com> wrote:
> Use:
>
> version (D_LP64)
> {
>      // 64-bit ...
> }
> else
> {
>      // 32-bit ...
> }

So why doesn't D_LP32 exist? If you already use "version(X86) else
version(X86_64)" you're going to have to swap all of your code around
if you start using D_LP64..

On 12/26/2011 8:23 AM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> On 12/26/11, Alex Rønne Petersen<xtzgzorex@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> Use:
>>
>> version (D_LP64)
>> {
>>       // 64-bit ...
>> }
>> else
>> {
>>       // 32-bit ...
>> }
>
> So why doesn't D_LP32 exist? If you already use "version(X86) else
> version(X86_64)" you're going to have to swap all of your code around
> if you start using D_LP64..

I agree, but I don't think D_LP32 would be correct since LP stands for "long pointer".

On 26-12-2011 14:23, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> On 12/26/11, Alex Rønne Petersen<xtzgzorex@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> Use:
>>
>> version (D_LP64)
>> {
>>       // 64-bit ...
>> }
>> else
>> {
>>       // 32-bit ...
>> }
>
> So why doesn't D_LP32 exist? If you already use "version(X86) else
> version(X86_64)" you're going to have to swap all of your code around
> if you start using D_LP64..

I don't think it's a big deal. You should write your code for D_LP64 in the first place anyway.

- Alex