Hello,

> i signed up by mistake

You never sign up by "mistake" on the TinyCC list.

Now you'll become a coder and help us release TCC v1.

We all count on you.

Make us proud.

Regards.


----- Mail d'origine -----
De: FarmerAl963 via Tinycc-devel <[email protected]>
À: [email protected]
Cc: FarmerAl963 <[email protected]>
Envoyé: Sun, 10 Aug 2025 20:59:46 +0200 (CEST)
Objet: Re: [Tinycc-devel]  Re : Re:  VERSION Number 1.0 - C11 vs. C99

I'm not a coder, i signed up by mistake, please quit sending me emails!

Sent from Proton Mail Android


-------- Original Message --------
On 8/10/25 10:23 AM,  <[email protected]> wrote:

>  Hello,
>  
>  > Anyone care?
>  
>  Never *EVER* make that assumption about a programming language.
>  
>  You'll soon find that things doesn't compile because someone thought "Anyone 
> care?"
>  
>  TCC is already regarded as an underdog due to its incompatibilities and 
> inabilities to compile existing code bases.
>  
>  Let's keep it professional and support the defined standard, not some half 
> assed bake of it based on preconceived ideas.
>  
>  > - _Noreturn: Please don't use
>  
>  Yes, do use in dedicated use cases (message loops, never ending threads, 
> etc).
>  
>  > - alignment specs: Anyone care?
>  
>  Memory alignment sensitive systems like micro controllers.
>  
>  Regards.
>  
>  
>  ----- Mail d'origine -----
>  De: Robin Rowe <[email protected]>
>  À: [email protected]
>  Envoyé: Sun, 10 Aug 2025 16:43:17 +0200 (CEST)
>  Objet: Re: [Tinycc-devel] VERSION Number 1.0 - C11 vs. C99
>  
>  On 8/10/2025 8:10 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>  > C11 added many features for modern software (multitasking support, etc).
>  
>  C11 vs. C99 Compiler Features
>  
>  - VLAs optional: Yay, do not need to implement
>  - anonymous struct nesting: Anyone care?
>  - _Generic macros: Anyone care?
>  - _Noreturn: Please don't use
>  - alignment specs: Anyone care?
>  - _Static_assert: Anyone care?
>  
>  C11 vs. C99 Standard Library Features
>  
>  Library features, not compiler, so not blocking tcc v1...
>  
>  - threads.h: Who cares? Multitasking in C99 with pthreads.h
>  - stdatomic.h: Nice for multiprocessing, what is status for tcc?
>  - uchar.h: Just say no to Unicode, use UTF-8
>  - stdio.h gets() removed: yes, should use gets_s instead
>  
>  Robin
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  > Let's say C99 should be covered indeed, 25 years in the making, but C11 
> shouldn't be ditched.
>  >
>  > Regards.
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > ----- Mail d'origine -----
>  > De: Страхиња Радић <[email protected]>
>  > À: [email protected]
>  > Envoyé: Sun, 10 Aug 2025 13:46:36 +0200 (CEST)
>  > Objet: Re: [Tinycc-devel]  Re : Re:  VERSION Number 1.0
>  >
>  > Дана 25/08/09 11:16AM, [email protected] написа:
>  >> Full C99 or C11 support ? C11 is safer and more "up to date" :
>  >>
>  >> 
> https://web.archive.org/web/20200806193736/https://smartbear.com/blog/test-and-monitor/c11-a-new-c-standard-aiming-at-safer-programming/
>  >>
>  >> Hence C11 should be getting way more prevalent in the existing source 
> code out there :
>  >
>  > C99 is the version of C standard which is preferred by the suckless
>  > movement. I think that the current main goal of tcc development should
>  > be focused on full support for C99. Core values behind tcc -
>  > simplicity, efficiency and frugality in software - are shared with the
>  > suckless movement, so having a simple, fast and efficient complete C99
>  > compiler would benefit the community more than diverting attention to
>  > the simultaneous development of C11 features.
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > Tinycc-devel mailing list
>  > [email protected]
>  > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
>  >
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > Tinycc-devel mailing list
>  > [email protected]
>  > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
>  
>  
>  --
>  Robin Rowe
>  310-359-8796
>  
>  _______________________________________________
>  Tinycc-devel mailing list
>  [email protected]
>  https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
>  
>  
>  _______________________________________________
>  Tinycc-devel mailing list
>  [email protected]
>  https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
>  

_______________________________________________
Tinycc-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel


_______________________________________________
Tinycc-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel

Reply via email to