[phobos] Use of X86 and X86_64 in druntime and phobos

[Alex]

Hi,

Patch for phobos: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/335

Regards,
Alex

On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 6:26 AM, Alex <xtzgzorex at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I've noticed an annoying trend in druntime and phobos of using the X86
> and X86_64 version identifiers to make _bitness-dependent_ decisions.
> Some code goes along the lines of:
>
> version (X86)
> {
>    ...
> }
> else version (X86_64)
> {
>    ...
> }
> else
>    static assert(false, "Unknown platform");
>
> In some cases, the assert isn't even present, so you just end up with
> compile errors that you need to go and investigate.
>
> There's also code such as:
>
> version (X86)
> {
>    ...
> }
> else
> {
>    ...
> }
>
> (Notice the unconditional else clause.)
>
> This makes porting of druntime and phobos to non-x86 architectures a
> massive pain; there are so many places that need to be checked by hand
> or they won't work correctly on either 32-bit or 64-bit architectures
> (and in some cases, you won't get any error at compile-time, but
> rather observe a runtime crash).
>
> I realize most non-DMD compilers maintain their own druntime/phobos
> trees, but one has to keep in mind that upstream druntime/phobos are
> merged into these regularly. I believe it is in everyone's best
> interest if we stop abusing architecture version identifiers as
> bitness version identifiers. IOW, use D_LP64 instead of X86 and
> X86_64.
>
> If we can agree on this, I'll gladly submit some patches to both
> projects to sort this out.
>
> (I ran into these issues while building GDC as an ARM cross-compiler.)
>
> Regards,
> Alex
>