A patch is applied to solve this bug.
2015-01-04 8:58 GMT+03:00, Sergey Korshunoff :
> After a previous patch applied...
> Bug: a line number declaration (# NUM xxx "file_name") is not used
> when generating a debug info. A test case: precompile your project
> files with tcc and then use a precomp
HI! A test attached is a snippet code from a nimrod compiler. Currenly
tcc fails to compile it rigth.
#include
typedef long long int NI64;
int main()
{
NI64 res = 0;
printf("Test for comparing a INT64 values: ");
if (res < -2147483648LL) {
printf("Error: 0 < -2147483648\n");
return
Le dimanche 4 janvier 2015, 08:10:40 Sergey Korshunoff a écrit :
> Return back a grischka patch which lost after
> "Split elf_output_file in smaller functions"
>
> Author: grischka
> Date: Tue Feb 5 21:18:29 2013 +0100
> tccelf: fix debug section relocation
> With:
>tcc -g hello.c
>
Le dimanche 4 janvier 2015, 11:04:22 Sergey Korshunoff a écrit :
> A patch is applied to solve this bug.
Hi Sergey,
Shouldn't file->line_num be passed as the last parameter of put_stabs?
Best regards,
Thomas
___
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Tinycc-devel
Le dimanche 4 janvier 2015, 07:53:44 Sergey Korshunoff a écrit :
> > This patch seems unnecessary as tcc_define_symbol with a third argument
> > NULL is equivalent as setting it to 1 (#define FOO is the same as #define
> > FOO 1)
> I trying to be exactly the same as gcc. And this macros in gcc ar
Yes, you are right. I'm lost the ground trying to detect a point after
which debugger don't do the work. tcc v0.9.25 was working. After a
grischka patch a debugger don't work. And exactly with the same
symptom: gdb refused to know "main".I don't understand why, sorry. Did
gdb work for you w/o a pa
May be yes. I don't found a code where a line info is passed to the put_stabs...
2015-01-04 16:49 GMT+03:00, Thomas Preud'homme :
> Le dimanche 4 janvier 2015, 11:04:22 Sergey Korshunoff a écrit :
>> A patch is applied to solve this bug.
>
> Hi Sergey,
>
> Shouldn't file->line_num be passed as the
By replacing a -2147483648 with a -2147483647 I can succesfully build
a working nim compiler. But this is not so good...
2015-01-04 12:45 GMT+03:00, Sergey Korshunoff :
> HI! A test attached is a snippet code from a nimrod compiler. Currenly
> tcc fails to compile it rigth.
__
As suggested on another forum, there is a "setarch linux32" command
for changing ARCH reported by "uname -m".
2015-01-04 2:45 GMT+03:00, Thomas Preud'homme :
> Le mardi 30 décembre 2014, 11:05:15 Sergey Korshunoff a écrit :
>> Problem: configure in 32bit userspace running on 64bit kernel is
>> try
Le dimanche 4 janvier 2015, 19:18:34 Sergey Korshunoff a écrit :
> By replacing a -2147483648 with a -2147483647 I can succesfully build
> a working nim compiler. But this is not so good...
The bug is in tccpp.c parse_number. The function tries to guess what should be
the size and sign of the lit
It is possible to correct a case for -2147483648 ? A code generated by
tcc and gcc is attached.
2015-01-04 19:18 GMT+03:00, Sergey Korshunoff :
> By replacing a -2147483648 with a -2147483647 I can succesfully build
> a working nim compiler. But this is not so good...
>
> 2015-01-04 12:45 GMT+03:
Le 2015-01-04 04:42, Sergey Korshunoff a écrit :
GCC and clang also error out for unknown option. What option caused
your
program to fail to compile?
The patch is for the case with -Wunsupported. In such case a user will
is "Don't trap, only warning". There are many gcc options which tcc
don't
Hi people...
Is it possible to create a debugger, for my own (Secret) programming language
using TinyCC?
I'll spare you the long details (unless you need it)...
but here goes as short as I can...
So... let's imagine... I'm converting high-level code into C code.
Then... in this C code... I wa
There is another approach: assume the constant is negative by default.
This is the method used in nimrod to scan a constants:
lib/pure/parseutils.nim(rawparse)
proc rawParseInt(s: string, b: var BiggestInt, start: int = 0): int =
var
sign: BiggestInt = -1 # minus by defaul
On 4 janv. 2015, at 15:10, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
> Le dimanche 4 janvier 2015, 07:53:44 Sergey Korshunoff a écrit :
>>> This patch seems unnecessary as tcc_define_symbol with a third argument
>>> NULL is equivalent as setting it to 1 (#define FOO is the same as #define
>>> FOO 1)
>> I trying
15 matches
Mail list logo
