On 5/21/2019 4:08 AM, Ben Hutchinson wrote:
Date: Sun, 19 May 2019 01:11:26 +0200
From: Daniel Gl?ckner <daniel...@gmx.net
<mailto:daniel...@gmx.net>>
If you don't need __chkstk, you are not compiling for Windows
and should
not use a TinyCC that is targetting Windows. TinyCC targetting
Linux does
not emit calls to __chkstk.
[snip snip snip]
If the official TinyCC developers were to make this one simple
change, TinyCC would no longer be a no-go for me, and in fact
TinyCC would then become my primary means to write Windows software.
It's quite puzzling to see this sort of request.
I agree with Austin that if the feature is so important, then
consider patching it yourself. It is easier to compile tcc
yourself and tweak whatever you want versus gcc. Or maybe use gcc -O0?
If you plan to write Windows software in C, I think assembly
output doesn't really matter for most devs. For CPUs now cache
misses are like train wrecks that limits max perf. Even how your
executable is aligned when loaded may have big effects on
performance. I just trust the compiler to do its thing. Install
MinGW or MSYS2 and use gcc, apply whatever compiler options that
are appropriate.
For modern PCs, I guess most devs still doing heavy-duty assembly
are for math performance or multimedia performance. And x86_64
skills may be more important nowadays than x86 skills.
Even for embedded programming, there is usually zero need to think
in assembly. Use the appropriate syntax and intrinsics and one can
write C code quickly and productively without ever needing to
remember CPU instruction mnemonics.
IMHO, to productively write Windows software in C, just think in
C. I'm curious as to why you have this unusual need.
--
Cheers,
Kein-Hong Man (esq.)
Selangor, Malaysia
_______________________________________________
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
