[issue22980] C extension naming doesn't take bitness into account

[Marc-Andre Lemburg]

Marc-Andre Lemburg added the comment:

On 02.12.2014 20:10, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> 
> Antoine Pitrou added the comment:
> 
> Le 02/12/2014 19:59, Marc-Andre Lemburg a écrit :
>>
>> My main point was that we shouldn't start adding tags for e.g.
>> PPC, Intel, ARM, etc. since platforms needing to support multiple
>> such architectures will typically support fat builds anyway.
>>
>> How about using these flags:
>>
>> b0 - 16-bit
>> b1 - 32-bit
>> b2 - 64-bit
>> b3 - 128-bit
> 
> Fair enough, although I think we only need 32-bit and 64-bit for now,
> and "32b" vs. "64b" would probably be more readable :-)

True, I'm just not sure what the parsing requirements are and
the ABI version names are too long already, IMO. PEP 425 used
a nice short variant for the Python part.

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue22980>
_______________________________________