From: oscarfv@telefonica.net (Óscar Fuentes)
Cc: 18699-done@debbugs.gnu.org
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 15:57:17 +0200
Perhaps you could ask the MinGW64 developers to change their mind
about that.
I could try, but my understanding is that they are not interested on
doing that, for multiple reasons. One of them is that, in theory, you
could use the MinGW-w64 compiler with the MinGW headers and libraries.
That's a nice theory, but I don't think it will hold, since (AFAIU)
the two compilers use different methods of throwing C++ exceptions
between DLLs.
What about __x86_64__, does it perhaps fit the bill already?
__x86_64__ is about the processor. It is also defined by gcc 4.8.2 on my
Kubuntu x86_64. Of course, being MinGW on x86_64 implies Windows 64. But
I've seen quite a few patch submissions about ARM support on the
MinGW-w64 ml, so an hypothetical Emacs compiled for Windows ARM 64bits
by MinGW would fail the __x86_64__ test. If that Emacs comes to light,
we probably would need to determine what's the right thing wrt
ALIGN_STACK, though.
So in this specific case __x86_64__ does not harm, but it is superfluous
on the presence on _WIN64.
It is there for Cygwin's sake,