Peter Maydell wrote: > On 23 November 2012 15:31, Jamie Lokier <ja...@shareable.org> wrote: > > x86 instruction sets haven't followed a linear progression of features > > for quite a while, especially including non-Intel chips, so it stopped > > making sense for GCC to indicate the instruction set in that way. > > If you're going to go down that route you need to start defining > #defines for features then, so we could say defined(__rdtsc__) > or defined(__cmov__) and so on. I don't see any of those either :-(
It does for some major architectural instructions groups like MMX, different kinds of SSE, etc. But not everything and I don't see cmov among them. I agree it's unfortunate. -- Jamie
