Re: [Tinycc-devel] Implementing gcc intrinsics

[Vladimir Vissoultchev]

This is a noble goal and tcc does a great job for the size of the codebase.

On the other hand using libtcc looks like a good way to JIT and/or compile
other languages quickly. Parse X language, emit plain C, ship a runtime and
you are in business :-)) This prospect attracts wannabe language enthusiasts
like myself and I won't be surprised if a new goal for "tcc as a language
kit" becomes popular.

Emitting plain C and using libtcc allows language X to be even interpreted
in it's own IDE before later compiling again with tcc (or with gcc -O2 if
available) to executables. So again I see this has been discussed, tcc as a
backend/JIT is attractive alternative provided that it now even has adequate
GAS support -- intrinsics are natural further development it this case.

I hate code-bloat and can see the "scars" the mob branch has inflicted on
the codebase. Now I consider some of my earlier commits to be mistakes
(tcc's -dM option anyone?) but sometimes impl a new feature in 10 lines of
code look very tempting. Copy/pasting 150 lines from
parse_line_comment/parse_comment I just don't understand.

cheers,
</wqw>


-----Original Message-----
From: Tinycc-devel [mailto:address@hidden
On Behalf Of Michael Matz
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 3:54 PM
To: address@hidden
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] Implementing gcc intrinsics

Hi,

On Fri, 8 Apr 2016, Vladimir Vissoultchev wrote:

> How would you implement intrinsic functions in tcc?

I wouldn't except for those that really need compiler support (which are
very few).  This is supposed to be a tiny CC, remember, with one goal being
C99 compatible (if we ever get there).  Not to implement everything that
other compilers provide.


Ciao,
Michael.

_______________________________________________
Tinycc-devel mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel