Thank you.
Regards.
- Mail d'origine -
De: Richard Allen
À: tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
Envoyé: Tue, 12 Sep 2023 18:45:10 +0200 (CEST)
Objet: [Tinycc-devel] Lock-free tcc
Hello,
It's my first time posting to this list.
A bit ago I started playing with the idea of a multi-threaded
Hi,
when using those "bare metal" options, you are not free to presume what the
compiler will do.
While I understand a simple assignation would be converted to the MOV
equivalent, no so for structs.
Not all compilers behave the same though, hence have a look on their respective
documentation
Hello,
On Tue, 12 Sep 2023, avih via Tinycc-devel wrote:
> Also, what is "pure machine code"? With neither input nor output it
> couldn't do anything but waste instruction cycles.
A function implemented in machine code, where the input is the
arguments in whatever calling convention the
Hello,
It's my first time posting to this list.
A bit ago I started playing with the idea of a multi-threaded compiler,
and put together a prototype using libtcc. I ran into the code-gen
mutex as a bottleneck.
It's based on an older commit, but I was able to refactor all global variables
into
On 12.09.2023 11:01, avih via Tinycc-devel wrote:
Tcc does not guarantee to compile pure C code into pure machine code,
and any pure-C implementation which the user provides might end up
depending on those functions involuntarily. The user has no control..
How do you define "pure C code"?
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 11:46:52 AM GMT+3,
wrote:
> If the 'memset' function you would provide also call 'memset' (aka itself)
> then indeed it goes into full recursion (aka chicken-egg) and you should
> reconsider your software architecture.
It does not call memset (or memmove
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:44:45 PM GMT+3, grischka
wrote:
On 12.09.2023 11:01, avih via Tinycc-devel wrote:
>> Tcc does not guarantee to compile pure C code into pure machine code,
>> and any pure-C implementation which the user provides might end up
>> depending on those functions
And actually, there's another potential issue here: even if my
suggestion was correct, how can I tell that the implementation
of memset which I provide doesn't end up requiring memset?
or that tomorrow it still won't require memset?
Basically, tcc expects a stand alone implementation of memset
