[swift-evolution] [Draft] Introducing Build Configuration Tests for Platform Conditions

[Erica Sadun]

Before going any further, is it possible to hop over to the [DRAFT] Introducing a Debug Build Configuration Test, and pick up where Joe Groff just left off?
Looks like things may not be as clear and orthogonal as I initially thought and it would help (a lot) if the discussion was all in one place.

Thanks! -- E


> On Mar 15, 2016, at 10:51 AM, William Dillon <william at housedillon.com> wrote:
> 
> The vast majority of special cases I’ve seen and written are due to the size of Int, not a pointer per se.  To clear up the confusion, how about we rename bitwidth to intwidth or intsize?
> 
> - Will
> 
>> On Mar 15, 2016, at 9:40 AM, Shawn Erickson via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>> 
>> I guess the fuzziness in my mind is when considering LP64, LLP64, etc. I believe swift attempts to avoid that by defining either 32 bit or 64 bit model. If that is universally the case then I think bitwidth is fine. If not then pointerwidth may be more correct. Those bridging to C would have to consider information from the C world to deal with the variations of type size based on platform and 32/64.
>> 
>> -Shawn
>> _______________________________________________
>> swift-evolution mailing list
>> swift-evolution at swift.org
>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>