Yes, you're right, I'm not sure why people are even comparing `zig cc` to `tcc`. `zig cc` at its core is just a wrapper over `clang` with some extra caching and cross-compilation added.
- TinyCC/tcc vs zig cc compile-times/etc. cblake
- TinyCC/tcc vs zig cc compile-times/etc. Hlaaftana
- TinyCC/tcc vs zig cc compile-times/etc. cblake
- TinyCC/tcc vs zig cc compile-times/etc. shirleyquirk
- TinyCC/tcc vs zig cc compile-times/etc. Zoom
- TinyCC/tcc vs zig cc compile-times/etc. Yardanico
- TinyCC/tcc vs zig cc compile-times/... rockcavera
- TinyCC/tcc vs zig cc compile-ti... inv2004
- TinyCC/tcc vs zig cc compile-ti... cblake
- TinyCC/tcc vs zig cc compile-ti... inv2004
- TinyCC/tcc vs zig cc compile-ti... cblake
- TinyCC/tcc vs zig cc compile-ti... AmjadBHD
- TinyCC/tcc vs zig cc compile-ti... shirleyquirk
- TinyCC/tcc vs zig cc compile-ti... Zoom
- TinyCC/tcc vs zig cc compile-ti... DIzer
- TinyCC/tcc vs zig cc compile-ti... cblake
