<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra">I like this direction in general, but:</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 7:40 PM, Saleem Abdulrasool <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:abdulras@fb.com" target="_blank">abdulras@fb.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div id=":co8" class="" style="overflow:hidden">{armv7,i686,x86_64}-windows-{ia,mingw,ms}pe </div>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>First a correction, I assume you mean: {armv7,i686,x86_64}-<vendor>-windows-{ia,mingw,ms}pe</div></div><br>I think these are the wrong ABI names. And if the environments are uniformly PE, I don't think we should bother with it.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">I would suggest:</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">...-windows-{msvc,gnu,itanium}</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">
MSVC is obvious.</div><div class="gmail_extra">Itanium is obvious.<br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_extra">GNU -> mingw's oddity.</div><div><br></div><div>Rationale:</div></div><div class="gmail_extra">
The "Min" isn't relevant to the ABI. The "W" is redundant. The "G" is the only relevant part, and it stands for GNU.</div></div>