On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 17:44 Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote:
On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 08:07:30 -0700 Steve Dower <steve.do...@python.org> wrote: > > This does only affect 32-bit builds, so now I'm thinking about the > possibility of treating those as highly compatible while the 64-bit > ones get better performance treatment, though I'm not sure how that > could actually play out. It may help remove some of the questions > about which one to use though. That sounds reasonable to me. I don't know Windows very much, but are there still many people using 32-bit Windows these days (on x86, I mean)? I don't know but I think it makes sense to follow Windows' lead. So if 3.5 supports Vista and Vista doesn't require SSE2 then CPython shouldn't either. If 3.6 or whatever drops support for Vista and if Windows 7 requires SSE2 then CPython can require it too. I assume this what happens with the OSX binaries. Note that my recently retired computer was 64 bit and had SSE but didn't have SSE2 (I'm fairly sure - CPU was some budget AMD model). Also after SSE2 we have SSE3 etc and I've seen no indication that x86-64 manufacturers are going to stop adding new instructions. So this general issue isn't limited to 32 bit hardware and won't be solved by special casing that. I think it makes sense to have a general policy for architectures that will be supported by the official build in future. -- Oscar
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
