As stated here : https://bellard.org/tcc/
"TCC is heading torward full ISOC99 compliance" Hence it is recognized as not being fully compliant. You might want to compare with LCC : https://drh.github.io/lcc/ The Pelles C compiler is base upon : http://www.smorgasbordet.com/pellesc/ Regards. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C99 ----- Mail d'origine ----- De: Michael Matz <matz....@frakked.de> À: tinycc-devel@nongnu.org Envoyé: Tue, 01 Mar 2022 15:55:08 +0100 (CET) Objet: Re: [Tinycc-devel] TinyCC does not accept variable-length static qualifier for function parameter arrays Hello, On Mon, 28 Feb 2022, John Scott wrote: > On Mon, 2022-02-28 at 09:25 +0100, david.k...@libertysurf.fr wrote: >> Gcc allows this, but Gcc is not conformant and creates "extensions" as it >> see fit. > This is not a GCC extension; it's my understanding that this is pure > C99. N2310 [1] (a C17 draft) 6.7.6.3 says > > A declaration of a parameter as "array of type" shall be adjusted to > "qualified pointer to type", where the type qualifiers (if any) are > those specified within the [ and ] of the array type derivation. If the > keyword static also appears within the [ and ] of the array type > derivation, then for each call to the function, the value of the > corresponding actual argument shall provide access to the first element > of an array with at least as many elements as specified by the size > expression. > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't argc+1 an expression? You are correct, it's ISO C and tcc isn't conforming in rejecting this. Patches welcome :-) Ciao, Michael. > > [1] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2310.pdf > _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel