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

2023-04-17 Thread certanan via Tinycc-devel
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

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

2023-04-17 Thread ian
Hi all. Honestly ? When I read "-- option to tcc", I laughed at lot ! I consider this particularly irrelevant, and Grishka's comment is right ("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.") Considering

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

2023-04-17 Thread grischka
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

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

2023-04-17 Thread avih via Tinycc-devel
What some random script tries or doesn't try to do is irrelevant. tcc should follow the spec and common practices. Generally speaking, applications which respect the POSIX syntax guidelines should treat non-option-argument "--" as an indication that all further arguments are operands: -