On 2016-07-05T16:00:11-0300, Marc Collin wrote:
> > I don't think this does what you expect it to do. At least looking at
> > the 8cc makefile, the compiler is hardcoded as `cc', not the expansion
> > of the variable `cc'.
>
> You are right.
> But the CC flag is accepted.
> Try "make CC=clang" an
Actually, "make CC=../1c/8cc" works but 8cc doesn't support no-strict-aliasing.
[ERROR] main.c:87: (null): unknown -W option: no-strict-aliasing
On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Marc Collin wrote:
>> I don't think this does what you expect it to do. At least looking at
>> the 8cc makefile, the
> I don't think this does what you expect it to do. At least looking at
> the 8cc makefile, the compiler is hardcoded as `cc', not the expansion
> of the variable `cc'.
You are right.
But the CC flag is accepted.
Try "make CC=clang" and it will work.
But "make CC=../1c/8cc" fails. Any idea how to
On 2016-07-05T15:31:57-0300, Marc Collin wrote:
> I did some tests with 8cc (because it's easier to build than scc for me).
> My results are that the binaries aren't identical.
> Here's a script so you can try to reproduce it.
>
> #!/bin/sh
> mkdir test_comp
> cd test_comp
> git clone https://gith
> On Jul 5, 2016, at 11:31 AM, Marc Collin wrote:
>
> I did some tests with 8cc (because it's easier to build than scc for me).
> My results are that the binaries aren't identical.
> Here's a script so you can try to reproduce it.
>
> #!/bin/sh
> mkdir test_comp
> cd test_comp
> git clone http
I did some tests with 8cc (because it's easier to build than scc for me).
My results are that the binaries aren't identical.
Here's a script so you can try to reproduce it.
#!/bin/sh
mkdir test_comp
cd test_comp
git clone https://github.com/rui314/8cc
mv 8cc 1c
cp -r 1c 2c
cp -r 1c Ac
cp -r 1c Bc
On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 08:11:51PM +0200, Hinnerk van Bruinehsen wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 07:24:38PM +0200, Quentin Rameau wrote:
> > > So let's consider 3 situations.
> > > 1-- Compile scc with gcc. Use the output binary to compile scc. Get B1
> > > 2-- Compile scc with tcc. Use the output
On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 07:24:38PM +0200, Quentin Rameau wrote:
> > So let's consider 3 situations.
> > 1-- Compile scc with gcc. Use the output binary to compile scc. Get B1
> > 2-- Compile scc with tcc. Use the output binary to compile scc. Get B2
> > 3-- Compile scc with clang. Use the output bi
> So let's consider 3 situations.
> 1-- Compile scc with gcc. Use the output binary to compile scc. Get B1
> 2-- Compile scc with tcc. Use the output binary to compile scc. Get B2
> 3-- Compile scc with clang. Use the output binary to compile scc. Get
> B3
>
> Are you saying that if we compare the
So let's consider 3 situations.
1-- Compile scc with gcc. Use the output binary to compile scc. Get B1
2-- Compile scc with tcc. Use the output binary to compile scc. Get B2
3-- Compile scc with clang. Use the output binary to compile scc. Get B3
Are you saying that if we compare the md5 of B1, B2
On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 7:49 AM, Marc Collin wrote:
> >Any compiler following the c99 standard will work.
> But a binary compiled with gcc or clang will suck. No?
> Even if scc source is suckless, won't the binary suck with we use
> gcc/clang to compile it?
If you need to build a compiler, and don
>That's not really the cause. You'll have to use a c99 compiler to build
>scc. Maybe yours need an option like “-std=c99”.
I got the idea from here.
https://sourceforge.net/p/schillix-on/schillix-on/ci/6071f8422be450d2c3abd949005e0cb02960932c/
I changed config.mk. #CC = c99 to CC = cc. Otherwise I
Hey Marc,
> Hey, I tried to compile scc with gcc and it failed because typeof is a
> gcc keyword and scc has a function called typeof on cc1/expr.c
That's not really the cause. You'll have to use a c99 compiler to build
scc. Maybe yours need an option like “-std=c99”.
> Then I got scc to compile.
Hey, I tried to compile scc with gcc and it failed because typeof is a
gcc keyword and scc has a function called typeof on cc1/expr.c
A rename from typeof to type_of fixes the issue.
--- a/cc1/expr.c
+++ b/cc1/expr.c
@@ -765,7 +765,7 @@
static Node *unary(void);
static Type *
-typeof(Node *np)
+
14 matches
Mail list logo
