On Jul 04 13:47:27, [email protected] wrote:
> >>
> >> Perfect would be if I just wrote it into the clang code directly.
> >> I am almost to the point where I could do that, actually. I know where it
> >> would go, I think.
> >
> > I don't get it. Do you mean to mess with the compiler so that
> > it implements itself the C functions that the system does not provide?
>
>
> Yep :> That is just exactly what I mean.... clang does stuff like this
> already to help you out. Adding in various libraries, rearranging header
> paths, sticking in compiler and linker flags, all to suit to build system and
> make things work.
Does clang currently provide implementations of functions that do not exist,
and link against them if the code calls them? Would you please shre an example?
If so, it seems to be quite a deviation from what a compiler is supposed to do.
If I call a compiler, I expect it to compile the given code, not something that
1. the system does not provide
2. the standard library such as libc does not provide
3. the given code does not contain
Jan
