Hi list,
I have recently pushed a commit(3715fd) which apply the optimisation I have
mentioned earlier here.
Everything works well except test 112_backtrace.Because my commit make
the error messages of bound checks vary from platform to platform.For
example,on x86_64 (the only platform effected b
It's about time, 0.9.27 is more than 4 years old !
Just make sure all opened bugs are fixed.
And update the includes to be more "complete".
You can check my own repo to see what I added as includes.
What's the plan for 1.0 ? Feature set ?
Why focusing on a specific date ("anniversary") for rel
Hi there,
I also vote *YES*.
Regards.
Le 08/07/2022 à 16:17, Antonio Prates a écrit :
Cool
___
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
--
İȃɲ ƝᵋᵃʳᶩỾ
--*menea...@gmail.com*
-- Dévelop
Cool
___
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
Hi list,
I am working on deal with the calls to memcpy() and memmove() in native
code generated by TinyCC.As of now,I have made this patch to optimize
the copying of small-sized structures.
But it seems to break a test (112_backtrace). I am not familiar with the
bound check part of TinyCC.Could a
+1 on the new release. I could eventually move to a newer TCC version with
my bug fix.
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 6:26 PM Sam Ellicott wrote:
> I also think a new release would be a good idea.
>
> ___
> Tinycc-devel mailing list
> Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
>
I also think a new release would be a good idea.
___
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
