Re: [Tinycc-devel] C++ or C?

[Axel Liljencrantz]

On 5/22/06, ice <address@hidden> wrote:
> Didn't early C++ compilers just translate the code to C?

Yes. This basically means that the C++-compiler is a front-end using C
as the intermediate language. This approach presents several problems,
some of which didn't exist in the early days:

* Implementing the standard C++ ABI - if you don't to this, you can't
link against any libraries not compiled with your compiler.
* Template metaprogramming is non-trivial to implement.
* If something goes wrong in the C compilation step or in the linking,
making the error messages make sense is _very_ hard.

> On 5/22/06, PerfectDark <address@hidden> wrote:
> >
> > >Is there any work somewhere to make a C++ compiler on top of tcc ?
> >
> > It is a hard, VERY hard work - to implement full ISO-compliant C++
> compiler(just look to gcc::cp code :) ) and, I think, it absolutely
> unuseful. Except excellent gcc C++ compiler, there are a lot of free
> compilers, even microsoft offer fast and free C/C++ compiler+PlatformSDK. I
> sure, that tcc should be stable, small, simple, fast and reliable C compiler
> (may be with simple and useful extensions - thanks to Ben Hinkle :) ) - with
> possibility to use as internal runtime C compiler ( I work on win32 and I
> HATE VisualBasic :) ).
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Tinycc-devel mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
> >
>
>
>
> --
> 43rd Law Of Computing: Anything that can go wro
> <br> <br>
> sig: segmentation fault: core dumped
> _______________________________________________
> Tinycc-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel


--
Axel