Re: [9fans] Compiling ken-cc on Linux

Ryan Gonzalez wrote: > See > https://bitbucket.org/plan9-from-bell-labs/9-cc/issues/1/problems-building-under-x64-linux > for some tips on fixing various errors you may encounter, including this > one. (I opened that issue like 8 months ago...) > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 11:10

Re: [9fans] Compiling ken-cc on Linux

Ryan Gonzalez writes: > Try going to the top of mathi.h and putting: > > #undef isnan > #undef isinf > > Stupid macros that don't look like macros. That worked. Even I didn't realize those as macros. But now I land in new error. /usr/include/features.h:148:3: warning:

Re: [9fans] Compiling ken-cc on Linux

Hi Ryan, Ryan Gonzalez writes: > See > https://bitbucket.org/plan9-from-bell-labs/9-cc/issues/1/problems-building-under-x64-linux > for some tips on fixing various errors you may encounter, including > this one. (I opened that issue like 8 months ago...) I followed your

Re: [9fans] Compiling ken-cc on Linux

Try going to the top of mathi.h and putting: #undef isnan #undef isinf Stupid macros that don't look like macros. On November 27, 2015 10:50:20 AM CST, Vasudev Kamath wrote: > >Hi Ryan, > >Ryan Gonzalez writes: >> See >>

Re: [9fans] Compiling ken-cc on Linux

On November 27, 2015 11:16:02 AM CST, Vasudev Kamath wrote: >Ryan Gonzalez writes: > >> Try going to the top of mathi.h and putting: >> >> #undef isnan >> #undef isinf >> >> Stupid macros that don't look like macros. > >That worked. Even I didn't

Re: [9fans] Compiling ken-cc on Linux

On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 09:13:20AM +0100, Giacomo Tesio wrote: > > I know nothing about compilers, but actually gcc and clang dimension and > complexity is astonishing. It's not astonishing: it's research. They want to prove that a black hole does exist. So they write a "model", a software

Re: [9fans] Compiling ken-cc on Linux

> What about ostensible crypto libraries that get their random numbers from > Walmart? Do they get those over the counter? Lucio.

Re: [9fans] Compiling ken-cc on Linux

On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 03:07:30PM +0100, Giacomo Tesio wrote: > > Funny, but actually I was wondering if there is any subtle issue in the > standards of the C language that makes it somehow hard to implement. I guess it depends on what is the "standard". The naked C language is (was) simple.

Re: [9fans] Compiling ken-cc on Linux

2015-11-27 13:42 GMT+01:00 : > On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 09:13:20AM +0100, Giacomo Tesio wrote: > > > > I know nothing about compilers, but actually gcc and clang dimension and > > complexity is astonishing. > > It's not astonishing: it's research. They want to prove that a

Re: [9fans] Compiling ken-cc on Linux

|How they ever got it going on a system with 64Kbytes of address space\ |, I'll never know. Yeah! --steffen

Re: [9fans] Compiling ken-cc on Linux

> Funny, but actually I was wondering if there is any subtle issue in the > standards of the C language that makes it somehow hard to implement. > For example I've met a few times weird implementations of libraries and > frameworks dictated by broken standards: once they are in, they can never >

Re: [9fans] Compiling ken-cc on Linux

Great point. And you actually don’t meet the minimum requirement for snarky messages. You argue the the large compilers are due to the increase in the complexity of the specification and the complexities of generating code for the Intel instruction set. To some extent you are correct. A modern

Re: [9fans] Compiling ken-cc on Linux

I have been following this discussion about the C compiler and can no longer stop myself from making a (snarky?) comment. The K standard for C was very much written when the C language was a higher than assembler language for the PDP-11 (at least that's how I became acquainted with it back in

Re: [9fans] Compiling ken-cc on Linux

arn...@skeeve.com wrote: |> Alternative compilers, like tcc, only build C on very few architectures / |> os with almost no optimization: they are much smaller, but still not |> standard compliant. |TCC compiles really fast, and it's (finally) good enough that I can use |it for my personal

Re: [9fans] Compiling ken-cc on Linux

> memory bug in Jörg Schilling's Bourne shell (likely developed only > on Solaris rooted) simply by compiling and starting it under > FreeBSD. And i have found stack read violations simply by running given cdrtools, this is not a surprise.

[9fans] libsec/port/hmac.c

hmac_x(uchar *p, ulong len, uchar *key, ulong klen, uchar *digest, DigestState *s, DigestState*(*x)(uchar*, ulong, uchar*, DigestState*), int xlen) { int i; uchar pad[Hmacblksz+1], innerdigest[256]; if(xlen > sizeof(innerdigest)) return nil;

Re: [9fans] Compiling ken-cc on Linux

2015-11-27 0:21 GMT+01:00 Charles Forsyth : > > On 26 November 2015 at 23:08, Ryan Gonzalez wrote: > >> Holy crap, that's crazy. I built it in debug mode on Linux, but I don't >> think it used that much. I only have 6 GB right now! > > > You have to

Re: [9fans] Compiling ken-cc on Linux

> I know nothing about compilers, but actually gcc and clang dimension and > complexity is astonishing. > I've always thought that this is due to their desire to compile many > different language optimized for many different OS and architectures on > many different OS and architecture. That is a