On Friday 05 October 2012 10:28:45 Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote: > This is the case with dev-lang/v8: it doesn't build on x32 > (<https://bugs.gentoo.org/423815>), and upstream said they *won't* > support x32 > (<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/v8-users/c-_URSZqTq8/7wHl095t2CMJ>).
i think you misread. they have no current plans to support it. there are (or at least were) people from intel working on it, although i don't know how far they got. > Note that with v8 it's not just about getting v8 itself to compile, but > also making it generate correct JIT code on x32, which would require > substantial changes to v8 code (in fact, a whole new 40K arch port, see > the discussion linked to above). i think upstream is mistaken there for various reasons. (1) it probably makes no sense to try and re-use the ia32 port for x32 and (2) the x32 and x64 port will most likely share a vast majority of code. after all, the entire register set is available to you in x32 the same as it is in x64. > Should dev-lang/v8 get p.masked on x32 profile, or is there some better > way to handle it? p.mask it for now makes sense if there is no portable/C implementation we can fall back onto -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
