On 8/12/21 14:39, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
On Thu, 12 Aug 2021, Michał Górny wrote:
On Thu, 2021-08-12 at 09:21 +0800, WANG Xuerui wrote:
I would say this is mostly aesthetic matter, because we have equally
long ARCH names like "microblaze" or "openrisc" too. From a user's
perspective I'd personally prefer "loong" to save some typing, but
"loongarch" wouldn't hurt that much either.
I think following upstream (i.e. "loongarch" convention) is better.
We have already caused some mess with custom names like "arm64".
Can we please keep these identifiers short? Currently all ARCH names are
5 characters at most (except prefix, of course). The total length of the
KEYWORDS line isn't the main issue here, but tools like eshowkw or
tables in the various web interfaces.
It is also in GLEP 53 if you need a formal reference:
"Note that no limit on the length of both fields in the keyword are
imposed. However, we cannot overemphasize our preference to keep
keywords small and sensible."
It seems the discussion has gone quiet for a while now, so I take that
we choose ARCH=loong over ARCH=loongarch according to GLEP 53?
If that doesn't receive much objection, I'll prepare and send the first
few eclass patches soon.
Ulrich
