<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Julien Fischer <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jfischer@opturion.com" target="_blank">jfischer@opturion.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 class="">On Thu, 6 Mar 2014, Paul Bone wrote:<br>
<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">
On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 07:23:52PM +1100, Peter Wang 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">
On Tue, 4 Mar 2014 14:43:47 +1100, Paul Bone <<a href="mailto:paul@bone.id.au" target="_blank">paul@bone.id.au</a>> 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"><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">
If we're going to change the output then perhaps it would be better to<br>
just drop the word "configured"?<br>
<br>
Mercury Compiler, version rotd-2013-10-01, for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I don't mind, I don't understand the difference. If my change is<br>
unnecessary then this change is also unnecessary.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I didn't say otherwise. I mooted an alternative way to satisfy your<br>
goal. It's closer to the old format and IMO it looks better, so I find<br>
it easier to scan visually. I thought it's worth consideration.<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Okay,<br>
<br>
I think this is reasonable, and I'm not sure which 'looks better' so if you<br>
think this looks better I'm happy to go with that. I also want to change<br>
the word "for" to "on"<br>
<br>
Mercury Compiler, version rotd-2013-10-01, on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
I disagree with changing "for" to "on". There are two possible<br>
architectures you might report here: the host architecture (i.e. what<br>
mmc is running on) and the target architecture (i.e. what mmc is<br>
generating code for). The architecture string reported in the version<br>
message is the latter, and "for" seems the more appropriate preposition.<br>
For example if I have a mingw cross-compiler on Linux, mmc will (with<br>
your change) now report:<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Actually, ignore that it's not the target architecture it's reporting after all, it's</div><div>whatever MR_FULLARCH was set to in the library that mmc was linked against.</div>
<div>I think that since we now support cross compiling it would be more sensible to</div><div>do something like:</div><div><br></div><div> Mercury Compiler, version 14.01<br></div><div> Copyright (C) ... etc etc</div>
<div> Host: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu</div><div> Target: i686-pc-mingw32</div><div> Usage: mmc [<options>] <arguments></div><div> Use `mmc --help' for more information.</div><div><br></div><div>where Target is the architecture string from the Mercury.config file (if available).</div>
<div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Julien.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div> </div></div></div></div>