Date:	Sun, 8 Aug 1999 13:57:13 +0300 (IDT)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	Richard Dawe <richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com>
cc:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: CPU ID program, second version
In-Reply-To:	<37A9D003.29F98D34@tudor21.net>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.990808135630.23423H-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Thu, 5 Aug 1999, Richard Dawe wrote:

> Morten Welinder wrote:
> > Also, your switch statement is incomplete -- add a default case and
> > call it "ix86" or something like that.
> 
> Would it not be better to have 'i386' instead, since this is the earliest
> x86 processor that DJGPP works with?

In the part of the code that has that switch we already know that the
CPU is at least i486.  Therefore, i486 is a more accurate result, I
think.

- Raw text -