>> Looks like a right way to get a working cfront is to start from cfront-1 >> and then replace files with ones from 3.0.3 sources. > Depends on the definitions of "right" and "working". What are you aiming at? > We know (modulo my laziness to express the knowhow in a "traditional" > notation) how to get a well working cfront-3.0.
There is a problem with build system (makefiles defines) which are not friendly. cfront-1.0 is prepared already regarding this problem. cfront-1.0 has a simpler to understand file layout comparing to the cfront-3.0. I always prefere to start/continue something working. > An easier but much less certain way would be to try to talk to someone at > AT&T - this would be certainly a lot more efficient, _if_ it could work. Easiest way to start this process is to place cfront project on the github (for example). Some attention of the press to this problem may help. I think all are forgot about cfront like all forgot p2c compiler. cfront can help to teach a C++ But for this a cfront must be usefull on the modern systems. _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
