[LLVMdev] Unifying Windows Target Triples

[Saleem Abdulrasool]

On Feb 27, 2014, at 7:48 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote:

> I like this direction in general, but:

Excellent!

> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 7:40 PM, Saleem Abdulrasool <abdulras at fb.com> wrote:
> {armv7,i686,x86_64}-windows-{ia,mingw,ms}pe 
> 
> First a correction, I assume you mean: {armv7,i686,x86_64}-<vendor>-windows-{ia,mingw,ms}pe

That is indeed what I meant.

> I think these are the wrong ABI names. And if the environments are uniformly PE, I don't think we should bother with it.

I should have been more clear, the currently supported environments are PE.  There are versions of Windows which use other formats, and so I would prefer to retain the PE.

> I would suggest:
> 
> ...-windows-{msvc,gnu,itanium}
> 
> MSVC is obvious.
> Itanium is obvious.
> GNU -> mingw's oddity.
> 
> Rationale:
> The "Min" isn't relevant to the ABI. The "W" is redundant. The "G" is the only relevant part, and it stands for GNU.

The rational is entirely valid.  You raise an excellent point that I failed to consider, MinGW is really "Minimalist GNU on Windows”.  I find ia (or ia64) to be nicer, but, Id be happy enough with itanium.

Would you be willing to agree to:

{armv7,i686,x86_64}-<vendor>-windows-{ia,gnu,ms}pe

-- 
Saleem Abdulrasool
abdulras (at) fb (dot) com