On 8/10/2025 2:36 PM, [email protected] wrote:
https://www.reddit.com/r/C_Programming/comments/1g0fqgw/am_i_the_only_one_on_this_planet/
Anyone else using TCC for "serious" development ?
Are we confusing cause and effect? The 0.9 version label is the
maintainer telling everyone that tcc is not ready, a warning against
serious use until 1.0.
Let's say Pelles C, SDCC, chibicc, cproc, LCC (C89), vbcc (C99), kefir, slimcc,
...
If TCC was up to their tasks, they would have used it instead of these
alternatives.
Interesting. Are you recommending these over tcc? As slimcc already
supports C23, is that your favorite?
Or can compile but doesn't behave like GCC :
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/79219698/why-does-tinycc-fail-to-link-standard-c-runtime-functions-in-32-bit-mode-but-wor
Has the patch provided by this reddit post been integrated? Who is the
build master to track this?
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/75739020/c-code-compiles-and-runs-under-tiny-c-compiler-but-it-does-not-run-under-gcc
Seems not a tcc issue. UB code bug.
What micro-controllers does tcc support?
ARM (STM32, etc) ? RISC-V (ESP32, etc) ?
Interesting. Who is building software with tcc on ARM Cortex-M? Or, with
RISC-V ESP32-C3 or ESP32-C6?
While new and up to date C standard are published, you request to stay on a 25+
year old standard.
Have I proposed anything? I merely asked what is needed to bring tcc to
version 1.0.
Robin
_______________________________________________
Tinycc-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
