@ProcessorArch

[Jon]

I think @ProcessorArch is badly named as it gives the OS architecture where is should give the CPU architecture.

Suggest we change it, and add an @OSArch macro as well.

[TicketCleanup]

Automatic ticket cleanup.

[J-Paul Mesnage]

at the type I code this macro, I was thinking that the Windows API will return the real architecture. I have to admit that it is not working as I though.
So I don't know if we really need a processor arch but OS arch is Ok for me
@ProcessorArch -> @OSArch

[J-Paul Mesnage]

just some addition ​http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms724958(VS.85).aspx
I really don't understand why the return info is wrong from my point of view (Windows Bug???)

[Jon]

I'm thinking of adding @OSArch to replace @ProcessorArch and then add a new @CPUArch for the CPU type (CPU instead of Processor to avoid subtle errors in old scripts).

[anonymous]

Replying to Jon:

I'm thinking of adding @OSArch to replace @ProcessorArch and then add a new @CPUArch for the CPU type (CPU instead of Processor to avoid subtle errors in old scripts).

That's fine. I still don't understand the MSDN doc

[Jon]

Not quite sure why. The MSDN docs clearly say "The processor architecture of the installed operating system" and not the CPU type.

[Jon]

Seems like the only way to check for a x64 chip when running an x86 OS is using assembler. Not really in the mood for that one...

[Jon]

​http://www.osdev.org/wiki/X86-64

[anonymous]

Replying to Jon:

Not quite sure why. The MSDN docs clearly say "The processor architecture of the installed operating system" and not the CPU type.

for me processor Architecture is equivalent to CPU Type according to the return Values possible. But well who knows ...

[anonymous]

Replying to Jon:

​http://www.osdev.org/wiki/X86-64

bad link !!!

[J-Paul Mesnage]

Replying to anonymous:

Replying to Jon:

​http://www.osdev.org/wiki/X86-64

bad link !!!

link now works

[Valik]

Added in version: 3.2.13.7