Re: [Tinycc-devel] Implementation of '--' argument

[certanan]

I'm not sure if I understood your question correctly, but compiling a version 
of tcc that hasn't replaced '--' with '-run' seems to be a bit of a nuisance - 
it does not support the x86_64 architecture.
I don't think that there are very many people stuck on i386 nowadays, plus I 
can't see how a considerable amount of people hacking their own tcc 
installations to support their x86_64 would be more viable than simply 
upgrading it to more recent versions. It's more likely that there are few 
scripts relying on '--' out there and that they aren't used.

I'm not sure if altering these scripts to a conformant form wouldn't be more 
ideal than modifying tcc itself, in the end. As I am neither a seasoned tcc 
user nor a hardened industry software developer, I will leave this up to the 
more experience ones of you to decide.
One way or another, implementing an error message pointing users in the right 
direction instead of the generic "invalid option" error would do no harm, or 
would it?

- certanan


------- Original Message -------
On Tuesday, April 18th, 2023 at 8:37 AM, grischka <grishka@gmx.de> wrote:


> On 18.04.2023 07:41, certanan via Tinycc-devel wrote:
> 
> > I couldn't find any specific reasons as to why '--' was replaced by '-run' 
> > (other than '-run' being implicitly more coherent than '--'). Since there 
> > is a possibility that older scripts still depend on '--', would it be a bad 
> > idea to re-implement it for the sake of backward compatibility, and state 
> > its deprecated status in documentation?
> 
> 
> What about the possibility that the "older" script that you found
> 
> https://github.com/qemacs/qemacs/blob/master/qe.tcc
> 
> still exists there unchanged because nobody did even try it with
> a more recent version of tcc since then?
> 
> Did you check how well it would work at all?
> 
> -- gr
> 
> > - certanan
> > 
> > ------- Original Message -------
> > On Monday, April 17th, 2023 at 8:18 AM, grischka grishka@gmx.de wrote:
> > 
> > > On 17.04.2023 07:59, avih via Tinycc-devel wrote:
> > > 
> > > > What some random script tries or doesn't try to do is irrelevant.
> > > 
> > > In a case however where the script and the tcc to be used with it
> > > were written by the same author at the same time, we probably better
> > > assume that it actually did work.
> > > 
> > > As it seems the purpose was different though, i.e. the '--' once
> > > was used with instant execution to separate tcc args from the
> > > program's args.
> > > 
> > > See commit here (from almost exactly 20 years ago) where "--" then
> > > was replaced by "-run" as it still exists.
> > > 
> > > https://repo.or.cz/tinycc.git/commitdiff/40987541dc683a13cef764aa33f5da21b2660817
> > > 
> > > > tcc should follow the spec and common practices.
> > > 
> > > ... provided that these do make sense in tcc's own context. In cases
> > > it better shouldn't.
> > > 
> > > For example, not to support compilation of files such as -c.c is
> > > not a problem as long as we assume that such files do not exist.
> > > 
> > > Other than that tcc currently does support these forms with -run:
> > > tcc options [files less one] -run last_file arguments
> > > and also
> > > tcc "-run options" file arguments (for usage with "#!", see ex4.c)
> > > and also
> > > tcc options files -run @ arguments
> > > 
> > > I'd consider the latter form still rather "unofficial" so we could
> > > still replace it by
> > > 
> > > tcc options files -run -- arguments
> > > 
> > > which might (or might not) look better, in some sense.
> > > 
> > > What do people think?
> > > 
> > > -- grischka
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Tinycc-devel mailing list
> > > Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
> > > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Tinycc-devel mailing list
> > Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
> > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Tinycc-devel mailing list
> Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel