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

erik quanstrom wrote: |> 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.

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

On November 29, 2015 3:41:45 AM CST, Vasudev Kamath wrote: >Ryan Gonzalez writes: > >>>That took compilation further but now it breaks at point 4 in your >>>issue. I hope I won't encounter more new issues :-). >>> >> >> Ah, yes, I completely forgot

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

Ryan Gonzalez writes: >>That took compilation further but now it breaks at point 4 in your >>issue. I hope I won't encounter more new issues :-). >> > > Ah, yes, I completely forgot about that part. :/ Good luck with the > rest of the compilation! You'll need it! Yes indeed.

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

On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 07:57:58AM +0200, lu...@proxima.alt.za wrote: > > I remember using AutoCad 2.6 on an 8086 with a floating point > accelerator and being impressed by the speed of its 3D rendering. I > have no idea how AutoCad behaves these days, but faster rendering > would imply

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

Not dogmatic. Just 38 years and I still believe small is beautify. One interesting thing is that for the past twenty years new architectures have been designed to run C code well. Just check out the papers a ISCA. Then why do we have to have such complicated compilers to generate code for it.

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

On November 28, 2015 12:42:25 AM CST, da Tyga wrote: >I have been following this discussion about the C compiler and can no >longer stop myself from making a (snarky?) comment. > If you thing this is snarky, you've never visited the Final Fantasy XV board on GameFAQs! ;)

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

Brantley wrote: > One could argue that the Plan 9 C compiler lacks the modern optimizations > that the other compilers have. This would be true. But I would argue that > almost all of those optimizations are either not needed... Note the "almost all" in there. It's important not to get

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

> I think the issue is trying to fix a broken problem. Perfect > compatibility is pretty much impossible, but most attempts done to fix > it just shift the pain to somewhere else. What's the quote about > complexity not disappearing, just moving around? Basically, increased CPU complexity

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

> One interesting thing is that for the past twenty years new > architectures have been designed to run C code well. Just check out > the papers a ISCA. Then why do we have to have such complicated > compilers to generate code for it. I'm pretty sure that you can lay that at C's door. Had

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.

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

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

That copy of the compilers was changed quite a bit by someone else, and I only belatedly realised that. I'll try to resurrect that one, since it would help me keep the Plan 9 and Inferno compilers in sync, as well. On 25 November 2015 at 17:24, Vasudev Kamath wrote: >

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

On 25 November 2015 at 17:10, Vasudev Kamath wrote: > In file included from > /home/vasudev/Documents/C_programming/compilers/9-cc/Linux/386/include/lib9.h:9:0, > from 9obj.c:5: > /usr/include/features.h:148:3: warning: #warning "_BSD_SOURCE and >

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

>> In file included from >> /home/vasudev/Documents/C_programming/compilers/9-cc/Linux/386/include/lib9.h:9:0, >> from 9obj.c:5: >> /usr/include/features.h:148:3: warning: #warning "_BSD_SOURCE and >> _SVID_SOURCE are deprecated, use _DEFAULT_SOURCE" [-Wcpp] >> # warning

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

On November 26, 2015 6:10:43 AM CST, Charles Forsyth wrote: >On 25 November 2015 at 17:10, Vasudev Kamath >wrote: > >> In file included from >> >/home/vasudev/Documents/C_programming/compilers/9-cc/Linux/386/include/lib9.h:9:0, >>

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

On 26 November 2015 at 18:15, Ryan Gonzalez wrote: > the only library on earth that makes me want to bang my head on the floor. There must be others, surely. What about graphics libraries with APIs designed for FORTRAN (no data structures)? What about ostensible crypto

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

> the only library on earth that makes me want to bang my head on the floor. > You need to get out more

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

On November 26, 2015 3:56:44 PM CST, Charles Forsyth wrote: >On 26 November 2015 at 21:51, Charles Forsyth > >wrote: > >> On 26 November 2015 at 21:49, Ryan Gonzalez wrote: >> >>> All that is bad...but glibc is worse. The

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

On November 26, 2015 3:31:11 PM CST, Charles Forsyth wrote: >On 26 November 2015 at 18:15, Ryan Gonzalez wrote: > >> the only library on earth that makes me want to bang my head on the >floor. > > >There must be others, surely. What about graphics

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

On 26 November 2015 at 21:49, Ryan Gonzalez wrote: > All that is bad...but glibc is worse. The issue is that you kinda *have* > to use it, true, very true.

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

On 26 November 2015 at 21:51, Charles Forsyth wrote: > On 26 November 2015 at 21:49, Ryan Gonzalez wrote: > >> All that is bad...but glibc is worse. The issue is that you kinda *have* >> to use it, > > > true, very true. i remember glibc being my

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

>> I remember the time I was trying to build LLVM+Clang on Windows in debug >> mode. Because...MinGW...I actually surpassed the file size limit when >> linking Clang, so I had to rebuild EVERYTHING. Stupid thing took about an >> hour each time. > > > Ah. Debug mode. It took me a while to suspect:

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

On 26 November 2015 at 22:02, Ryan Gonzalez wrote: > I remember the time I was trying to build LLVM+Clang on Windows in debug > mode. Because...MinGW...I actually surpassed the file size limit when > linking Clang, so I had to rebuild EVERYTHING. Stupid thing took about an >

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

Clearly history is wrong. It would never be able to compile C in less than 18MB (1/2 of clang’s text size). Therefor Unix didn’t really happen. It’s all been a phone company conspiracy for world domination, like the NASA not really putting a man on the moon. We were just *told* they had built

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

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 remember that a C compiler is one of the largest, most complex software components

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

On November 26, 2015 5:21:54 PM CST, Charles Forsyth wrote: >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! >

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

On November 26, 2015 4:30:32 PM CST, David du Colombier <0in...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I remember the time I was trying to build LLVM+Clang on Windows in >debug >>> mode. Because...MinGW...I actually surpassed the file size limit >when >>> linking Clang, so I had to rebuild EVERYTHING. Stupid

[9fans] Compiling ken-cc on Linux

Hi, I'm trying to compile ken-cc from ¹. Its giving me following error cc -c -m32 -g -O -I/home/vasudev/Documents/C_programming/compilers/9-cc/Linux/386/include -I/home/vasudev/Documents/C_programming/compilers/9-cc/include -DLINUX_386 -I../cmd/ 9obj.c In file included from

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

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 AM, Vasudev Kamath wrote:

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

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...) Thanks Ryan, I will follow