[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Tinycc-devel] Regression on ARM
From: |
grischka |
Subject: |
Re: [Tinycc-devel] Regression on ARM |
Date: |
Thu, 29 Nov 2012 20:36:08 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) |
Kirill Smelkov wrote:
Maybe yes, but that filter-outs and a lot of ifdefs inside tcc sources
looks not so good to me. ...
I agree that it looks horrible. Plus there is still the comment
# these should work too
# TESTS += test1 test2 speedtest btest weaktest
which doesn't make any sense if you read through the tests/makefile
how it is now.
Anyway, test1 and test2 are part of test3, speedtest is non-obvious
number spam, btest is not a feature that we can't recommend to use
really (at least as long as tcc -btest tcc.c doesn't produce anything
useful), and I don't understand the extra weaktest since it is in
tcctest.c also.
So I'd vote to step back to just
TESTS = test3 libtest
which would get rid of filter-out's, lots of the ugly := operators
and most platform trouble at the same time. Just my 2 cents... ;)
--- grischka
- [Tinycc-devel] Regression on ARM, robotux, 2012/11/20
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] Regression on ARM, Kirill Smelkov, 2012/11/21
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] Regression on ARM, Thomas Preud'homme, 2012/11/21
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] Regression on ARM, Kirill Smelkov, 2012/11/22
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] Regression on ARM, Thomas Preud'homme, 2012/11/22
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] Regression on ARM, Kirill Smelkov, 2012/11/24
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] Regression on ARM, Thomas Preud'homme, 2012/11/24
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] Regression on ARM, Kirill Smelkov, 2012/11/25
- [Tinycc-devel] [PATCH] arm: Handle __builtin_frame_address(1) correctly, Kirill Smelkov, 2012/11/29
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] [PATCH] arm: Handle __builtin_frame_address(1) correctly, Daniel Glöckner, 2012/11/29
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] Regression on ARM, Kirill Smelkov, 2012/11/22