On 11 October 2012 07:00, KHMan
<address@hidden> wrote:
On 10/11/2012 6:14 PM, Oleg N. Cher wrote:
Thank you for words of wisdom that Milutin Jovanović said.
2 Jared Maddox: I do not acts as domineering screamer.
I just unpleasantly surprised that the thing that should be in the
compiler is perceived by someone as an optional extra feature. And
the reducing size of a compiler and wish to have fast compilation
are called as obstacles and reasons not to implement smart
linking. But all that I suggest is to increase *average*
compilation speed more.
And do you want to be offended by me or assist to give themselves
and others a good compiler? [snip snip snip]
The crux of the matter is this: tcc is a resource-starved project. This is common with lots of small, niche projects.
The problem with giving ideas is that no one will implement them. The only thing that will move the project forward is actual code or patches.
Even if people are excited about a proposal, getting it done is another big problem. I've seen a lot of coders wanting to do some feature, but end up abandoned and forgotten. Heck, I've done that lots of times myself.
So you need to be cognizant of the project's limitations and the community's limitations, because we too have tons of ideas, and too little time to implement them.
Long story short, if you can code, you have the power. The only opinion that really matter is the fellow who has the commit permissions for tcc. It can always be forked if opinions differ, no big deal.
--
Cheers,
Kein-Hong Man (esq.)
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia