[memtagabielf64] Clarify scope of memtagabielf64 document#397
[memtagabielf64] Clarify scope of memtagabielf64 document#397yury-khrustalev wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Clarify the scope of the document to avoid confusion about applicability of the recommendations in this document to Linux operating systems.
|
I do not have a strong opinion about it, but maybe 'Linux' is too broad, since it encompasses not only the GNU ABI but also other unrelated ABIs/runtimes (Go, Rust, Java, etc.). And it is also misleading because it is already partially supported on Android (which is essentially Linux), and some pieces are in binutils and LLVM. I would leave the text as-is; it already states that it is a recommendation, and the ecosystem is free to implement it or not. |
smithp35
left a comment
smithp35
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't have a strong opinion about adding the clarification either. Perhaps we can wait until there is some specific differences that can be highlighted.
I've made a wording change that uses GNU/Linux which is perhaps a bit more distinct from Android.
| recommendations for a SysVr4 like operating system such as Linux. | ||
| code-generation tools that generate such code. | ||
|
|
||
| This document will present recommendations for a SysVr4 like operating systems |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perhaps
This document will present recommendations for a SysVr4 like operating system such as Linux. Any specific GNU/Linux implementation details will be documented in the SYSVABI_ and AAPCS64_ documents.
3 participants
Clarify the scope of the document to avoid confusion about applicability of the recommendations in this document to Linux operating systems.
Fixes #381