On Sat, 10 Feb 2001, Ben Harris wrote:

: Now, I suppose I could make all the conditionals check all of __arm__,
: __arm32__ and __arm26__, but since the current arm26 and arm32 compilers,
: along with my experimental shared comiler, all define __arm__, it seemed
: excessive to check all three.
:
: If the current arm26 and arm32 compilers shouldn't be defining __arm__, I'll
: change the conditionals (and the compilers) to match.

Well, this is a little iffy.

The compilers can define __arm__ -- given that they have the same asm syntax
and whatnot; though I'm not completely happy with it, sparc64 defines
__sparc__ for this reason.  So this much is OK.

Given that, if you're using __arm__ to discriminate CPU family-specific
stuff, that's OK to use here.  Typically we want to use the MACHINE_ARCH
based definitions, but I can accept this as an exception.

This is my personal opinion based on subjective interpretation of NetBSD
prior art.

-- 
-- Todd Vierling <tv@wasabisystems.com>  *  Wasabi NetBSD:  Run with it.
-- NetBSD 1.5 now available on CD-ROM  --  http://www.wasabisystems.com/