First of all : Hello.
I really rarely answer (when I unexpectedly could), BUT :
with tcc, this (test.c)
#include
#include
int main(void) {
printf("%d\n", PTHREAD_PRIO_NONE);
return 0;
}
|compiles and ouputs :|
|ian@KsyNET-0:~$ tcc -run test.c
0
ian@KsyNET-0:~$
|
|Furt
Hi you all
IMHO, since static initialization must be done with litterals, the
expression (-1.0 <0) must be evaluated, hence should fail.
AFAIK it's even done (in that case) before main is called.
Seems to me like a preprocessing stuff.
--ian
Le 21/05/2023 à 23:27, Fred van Kempen via Tin
Hi all.
Honestly ? When I read "-- option to tcc", I laughed at lot !
I consider this particularly irrelevant, and Grishka's comment is right
("For example, not to support compilation of files such as -c.c is not a
problem as long as we assume that such files do not exist.")
Considering
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*
--
Hi
One thing or the other :
- you wanna learn asm or algorithmics, and it's not the best place; but
you obviously need to have to know them a "few",
- or, you already know how to code something in ASM, and then the
suggested book about how to make an interpreter is the good starting
point for
))
NaN
It seems to me that using a sign bit on NaN is a design error.
Regards to all, and best wishes.
*ian*
Le 05/01/2021 à 10:27, Vincent Lefevre a écrit :
> On 2021-01-04 04:59:28 +0100, Michael Matz wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> On Mon, 4 Jan 2021,
Since I had not enough permissions to install TCC
Le 13/12/2020 à 21:35, Anton Shepelev a écrit :
> Since I had not
> enough permissions to install TCC
--
-- sibian0...@gmail.com
-- Développeur compulsif
___
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Hi to all of you.
Just to say, I used to reformat about 30'000 lines with simple /sed/
commands (changing my old habit of tabulations to 2 or 4 spaces).
It's quite simple, the only thing that matter is to hamonize the habits,
everything else is superfluous.
Regards
Le 05/12/2020 à 11:11,
that Christian, while working on his own language,
is right in many ways You should read him with attention.
Take care all, and sorry for this.
ian
Le 09/09/2020 à 11:44, Christian Jullien a écrit :
>
> macOS:
>
>
>
> …
>
> compiling tcc.c 10 times
>
> (
Hi Christian,
You're right, obviously.
The point were only "a mailing-list ain't a chat".
But, yes, obviously again, Avi did a great job !!
Kind regards.
ian
Le 11/07/2020 à 08:01, Christian Jullien a écrit :
>
> Hi Ian,
>
> Sorry for the inconvenience.
>
>
Hi there.
My point is "Why should tcc be gcc compatible ?"
Its main aim is to be faster, and "on the run" via #!/usr/bin/tcc.
IMHO, support too many options, and relevant code behind, is
anti-productive.
Regards.
Le 11/07/2020 à 11:10, avih via Tinycc-devel a écrit :
> I don't have proper gcc
Hi.
Please consider not fucking everybody's mailing-list.
I ain't a chat hu ?
But FYI your contribution is welcomed, many thanks.
ian
Le 09/07/2020 à 23:16, avih via Tinycc-devel a écrit :
>
> I've pushed a fix to mob to support arbitrary libdir (c69290fb).
>
> The relative
BTW and IMHO, using a lib function (such as `strcmp`) in a compiler, is
*always* a bad solution.
... such as litterals like ""
Regards
Le 06/07/2020 à 18:16, Michael Matz a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> On Mon, 6 Jul 2020, Herman ten Brugge wrote:
>
>> In the old code you can also make it fail:
>>
Hi Christian,
It seems consistent to me.
Regards.
Le 16/01/2020 à 06:55, Christian Jullien a écrit :
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> When we use tcc on Linux, we also use /usr/include/*.h.
>
> Some definitions are only visible for C11 and controlled by use of
> _ISOC11_SOURCE as used by glibc (see for
the datas ? Not do a vectorial
addition, but use it like arrays or lists ?
Regards,
ian
Le 09/01/2020 à 16:50, uso ewin a écrit :
> On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 3:55 PM ian wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>> I stay at my position, and keep saying it has nothing to deal with a
>
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 3:55 PM ian wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>> I stay at my position, and keep saying it has nothing to deal with a
>> compiler !
>> It deals with assumptions concerning the main aim of data structures.
>> It seems that you know how to code it, so
-by-index array
elements sum !!!
Regards, ian.
Le 09/01/2020 à 12:34, Rasmus Riiner via Tinycc-devel a écrit :
> I would say that it is okay to generate low quality code, that it's
> better than nothing, as long the implementation doesn't impact the
> rest of the compiler too much... but
for instance) ?
I'm really still not sure the compiler should be extended for this,
because it makes a lot of assumptions about the purpose of the structure.
Have a nice day
ian
Le 07/01/2020 à 01:33, Michael Matz a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 6 Jan 2020, ian wrote:
>
>> Did
Michael,
Did I miss something ?
It seemed to me that it was dealing with application side of things.
Like, say, libraries. For the least, as long as compilers does not care
about maths or physics
If I'm wrong, please, explain to me where...
ian
Le 06/01/2020 à 21:46, Michael Matz a écrit
Hi Michael.
Is the support for data structures and calculations a real "need to" for
a compiler
regards,
ian
Le 06/01/2020 à 20:36, Michael Matz a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> On Mon, 6 Jan 2020, Rasmus Riiner via Tinycc-devel wrote:
>
>> See here: https://gcc.g
What a wise answer !
I was thinking exactly the same...
Nevertheless, I just pull down this morning the last commits, and AFAIK,
after a compile with the last mob from october it did work fine on
x86_32 debian10
But Grischka is right, it ain't the place for self testing, neither chat...
I agree too.
#TGIF
Le 13/12/2019 à 12:03, Christian Jullien a écrit :
> I LOVE that!!!
>
> If we all agree, is it possible to send an email once and only once with link
> to failure(s) when a new commit is done which breaks at least one supported
> architecture?
>
>
> -Original
Hi.
Wondering why you think a mailing-list is a review/tests review notepad.
Not under-rating your work, it's very fine, but why not a private chat ?
Or only when tested a simple comment on a fork ?
Btw, I'd be glad to test it on x86 32 bits linux 5.0.
Regards, ian
Le 02/12/2019 à 22:46
Hi.
On GNU/Linux x86, tcc built 24/10/2019,
same test case produces 5.00 too.
ian.
Le 27/10/2019 à 07:32, Christian Jullien a écrit :
> Trying your sample with mod on Windows -m64/-m32 I get:
>
> c: >tcc -m32 foo.c && foo
> 5.00
>
> c:>tcc -m64 foo.c &
Hi Pascal,
I *know* that (including the no-way part).
And I *know* too that this misuse is sometimes what's expected by
developers...
Anyway, I don't think it's desirable that kinds of pointers are checked.
Still my humble opinion.
-- ian (i...@sibian.fr)
-- développeur compulsif
Le 21/06/2019 à
-- ian (i...@sibian.fr)
-- développeur compulsif
Le 21/06/2019 à 15:33, Christian Jullien a écrit :
>
> If I read you correctly, you want to protest if type does not strictly
> match format directive.
>
>
>
> This is something even gcc does NOT ensure by default:
>
>
Hi all.
With all these changes, any idea of what release I should take for my
32bit machine ?
Any impact on something particular ?
FY I only use C at this time for all the most with JNI or so (or for
educational purpose, as they say).
Any clue ?
/btw Hi fab, so long..
-- ian (i
, my main aim was to use "tcc -run" which works very
fine :)
Thanks again.
ian
Le 24/11/2018 à 18:36, Michael Matz a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 24 Nov 2018, ian wrote:
>
>> None of my habits, but I'd like an advice. I didn't code in C for
>> many many
>>
luded from test.c:1:
In file included from /usr/include/stdio.h:27:
/usr/include/features.h:374: include file 'sys/cdefs.h' not found
Any clue ? Where was I wrong ?
--
-- ian (sibian0...@gmail.com)
-- développeur compulsif
___
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Ti
29 matches
Mail list logo
