On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 01:40:11AM +0800, rty wrote:
.\examples\fib.c:1: include file 'stdio.h' not found
my question: how to include stdio.h ?
I use windows98
TCC does not provide stdio.h, as it was originally targetted at unix-like
systems where C header files are usually provided by the
On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 08:46:31PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since we are already discussing ARM features, has anyone succeeded in
getting a _selfhosted_ ARM version for any kind of system (Windows CE
or Linux).
That would require an ARM inline assembler in TinyCC.
IIRC the one I wrote
On Thu, Sep 07, 2006 at 11:10:08PM -0500, Cayle Graumann wrote:
5) I switched to the ARMEL (EABI) environment, and reconfigured with
--enable-cross. As mentioned before the config.h file was not made.
Probably because uname -m is armv5tejl and configure only knows about
armv4l.
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 02:12:39PM -0500, Cayle Graumann wrote:
#define nelem(x)(sizeof (x)/sizeof (x)[0])
Try
#define nelem(x)(sizeof (x)/sizeof ((x)[0]))
parse_expr_type() needs the block after /* post operations */ from
unary() after skip(')') when parse_btype() is false.
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 12:42:12AM -0500, Cayle Graumann wrote:
When I try and compile the test code,
everything goes well until the linking step, when I get undefined symbol
errors for __libc_csu_fini and __libc_csu_init.
In my scratchbox environment /usr/lib/libc.so is a linker script
with
Patch is attached.
save_reg tried to save a floating point value from the value stack
because its r2 contained 0 (== TREG_EAX), but r2 is valid only for
VT_LLONG.
Daniel
diff -rud a/tcc.c b/tcc.c
--- a/tcc.c Sun Sep 24 18:34:55 2006
+++ b/tcc.c Sun Sep 24 18:35:16 2006
@@ -4585,7
On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 11:44:35PM -0400, Rob Landley wrote:
What exactly does this do? I mean, what _is_ arm EABI? The codesourcery
page
on this says that EABI is a nickname for Arm's documented ABI:
http://www.codesourcery.com/gnu_toolchains/arm/faq.html#q_ABI_what_is_abi
On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 04:52:19PM +0200, Daniel Glöckner wrote:
and I would not have inserted that bug in gen_cvt_itof by
incorrectly using func_old_type.
Patch for this bug (and another one that I found while testing the
patch) attached. Apply after the big EABI patch.
Daniel
diff -rwud
On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 11:49:53PM -0400, Rob Landley wrote:
Would someone please explain to me why stdarg.h says the va_args macros
are only correct for i386, but we have an arm eabi patch pending that
doesn't touch this file? Which is wrong?
The both are wrong.
The macros are correct for
On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 03:53:28PM -0400, Rob Landley wrote:
Is that the only one that needs per-arch tweaking?
Let's see...
The c67 target can pass only simple values = 4 bytes to functions and has
no code to handle the variable arguments passed in registers.
The il target is too abstract to
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 04:35:31PM -0400, Rob Landley wrote:
I just don't see why what machine you're running the compiler on is any of
the
compiler's business. It should only care what machine it's producing target
binaries for. So the difference between cross-compiling and native
On Sat, Oct 14, 2006 at 04:26:24AM +0800, bj wrote:
what is it's difference between mingw except for speed, size ,the fact
that it has no sound and no .rc resource compiling (by default)?
MinGW = GCC
GCC received a lot more testing and thus can more likely cope with
uncommon C constructs.
On 12 Oct 06 17:11, Rob Landley wrote:
and teaching it about dead code elimination are higher priority for me
than most other things.
Isn't that easy to do.
Think about
if(0) {
...
label:
...
}
...
goto label;
You may not discard the contents of the if until you are shure that the
label
On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 05:29:11AM -0800, tike64 wrote:
Thanks for hint. Why wasn't -lm needed when host machine was i386?
Glibc on i386 has ldexp in libc.so.6 as well as in libm.so.6, so -lm is
not needed.
Are you trying to compile it on Linux?
tcc.c:9505:2: warning: #warning add arch
On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 12:19:53AM -0800, tike64 wrote:
Daniel Glöckner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I prefer to just ln -s libgcc1_s.so to libtcc1.a.
I have used buildroot to make a toolchain. I couldn't find libgcc1*
from the tree - only libgcc.a and friends.
Sorry, I meant libgcc.a
On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 12:31:00PM -0400, David A. Wheeler wrote:
Many C compilers implement alloca() by simply manipulating the stack pointer.
Indeed, grischka's patch does this (though only for x86-32 Windows). But in
tinycc's case, the obvious way to do this will fail horrifically in
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 02:31:33PM -0400, David A. Wheeler wrote:
Unfortunately this breaks ({int x=1; x;}).
Sorry, I don't understand that last sentence.
({int x=1; x;}) puts a reference to x on vtop and leaves the block.
We may not reuse x's stack space.
int f() {
return ({int x=1;
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 12:56:03AM -0400, David A. Wheeler wrote:
Rob Landley:
Last I checked, tcc could also produce arm output. I take it this is going
to
need an arm version of the .S file? (This goes in... libtcc?)
I'm not planning to write the ARM code, but once the x86 code is
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 07:25:25PM -0400, David A. Wheeler wrote:
Rob Landley:
4) Daniel's arm version is way the heck shorter than your x86 version, and
seems more like what I'd expect for tcc...
That code doesn't interface with the bounded stuff... and if you use -b, it
should handle
, Daniel Glöckner wrote:
int f(int *x)
{
asm(xorl %0,%0:=r(*x));
}
Daniel
___
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 11:07:11AM -0300, Conrado Miranda wrote:
So I got the asm.c file at http://landley.net/code/tinycc/bugs. I tried to
compile but I got an error: asm.c:5: unknown opcode 'xorl'.
The bug asm.c triggers is that subst_asm_operand doesn't have enough
information to correctly
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 01:59:47AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
It boils down to a funky call to alloca()...
One thing to note is that memory for VLAs is freed when the block ends.
GCC does this by saving the stack pointer before allocating the VLA and
restoring it at the end of the block.
This
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 04:22:42PM +, Joshua Phillips wrote:
Since when can you only pass one argument to the interpreter? Try this:
#!/bin/echo -DTEST=1 -run
Put it in a file, chmod +x and run it. You get -DTEST=1 -run ./filename. If
you don't, then there's a problem with your
Patch is attached.
gfunc_prolog did not set VT_LVAL_xxx flags for function arguments.
I hope lvalue_type in that place always does the right thing.
Daniel
diff -rwud tinycc-orig/arm-gen.c tinycc/arm-gen.c
--- tinycc-orig/arm-gen.c Tue Dec 4 21:38:09 2007
+++ tinycc/arm-gen.cWed Aug
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 11:31:01AM +0800, ccecping wrote:
I am trying to compile tinycc to let it run on arm.
I downloaded tcc-0.9.24.tar, and I tried many times but failed,
I wonder if it can run ARM?
It does for some configurations.
Please tell us
- where you try to compile tinycc
- the
On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 04:23:50PM +0800, ccecping wrote:
/usr/lib/crtl.o: invalid object file
/usr/lib/crti.o: invalid object file
/usr/lib/libm.so:bad architecture
/usr/lib/libm.a: invalid object file
tcc: cannot find -lm
make:*** [tcc] Error 1
It needs crt1.o, crti.o, crtn.o, libm,
Yesterday I felt the urge to change a few things in TinyCC.
This is the first and biggest change of all of them.
- use __aeabi_*divmod functions in ARM EABI to make binaries depend
solely on standardized library functions
- refactor ARM floating point - integer conversion a bit
- rename long
- Builds all four possible ARM targets when cross compiling
- Adds some auto detection to select the target for native ARM builds
The auto detection will select EABI if it finds /lib/ld-linux.so.3.
It will select VFP floating point support when /proc/cpuinfo lists
a VFP or iWMMXt coprocessor.
This patch is useful for cross compilers. Without this patch tcc
tries to use the host's libraries, crt*.o and include files.
The patch prepends a string to all default paths. The string can
be passed to configure with --sysroot=string.
Daniel
diff -rud tcc-0.9.24-immed2/configure
On Fri, Sep 05, 2008 at 08:45:30AM +0800, ccecping wrote:
I can find crt*.o files under the cross compiler arm-linux-gcc directories.
Those crtbegin*.o and crtend*.o files provided by gcc are not needed by
TinyCC.
Did you build glibc yourself?
Daniel
On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 01:05:09AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
Sorry for the noise again, but isn't this what cvsps does already for
ages?
Wheels like being reinvented. :)
Daniel
___
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 05:06:43AM +0200, grischka wrote:
There are three diffs:
- arm.diff : some hunks seem to exist already in CVS
completely applied by bellard 2004-10-04 22:19:21
- bugfixes.diff : applies mostly but not completly
chunk 1+2 replaced by bellard 2004-10-18 00:18:20
chunk 3
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 02:23:45PM -0700, Josh Goldstein wrote:
/*
struct var_value
{
int var_type;
union var_data my_data;
}
*/
If I uncomment the commented part, I get the error. Is there a limit on the
number of structs or unions you can define?
Yes, but it is VERY high.
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 10:11:59PM +0800, ccecping wrote:
I compiled tcc with arm-tcc, and it can run on arm,
but needs lots of lib files to support, how to solve it?
which libary files should I copy to arm?
You need libc.so.6, libm.so.6, and libdl.so.2 to be able to run tcc.
On top of that
On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 09:31:34AM +0800, ccecping wrote:
But if I include stdio.h,
#include stdio.h
main()
{
int i=0;
i++;
printf(%d,i);
return 0;
}
then it said:
In file included from /hello.c:1;
In file included from /usr/local/include/stdio.h:62;
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 03:48:22PM +0800, ccecping wrote:
Can tcc compile the assembling language program?
For x86, yes.
For ARM, no.
and if it can ,how to configure it?
No special configuration needed.
Daniel
___
Tinycc-devel mailing list
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 08:50:22AM +0100, Masha Rabinovich wrote:
int a = 2.0 ? 0 : 1;
int b = (_Bool)2.0;
int c = !2.0;
int d = 2.0;
int e = (char)500;
int main()
{
printf(%d %d %d %d %d\n, a, b, c, d, e);
}
GCC output: 0 1 0 2 -12
TCC output: 1 0 1 0 500
Nice example. It
On 30 Nov 08 05:12, shinichiro. h wrote:
I've worked on porting TCC for x86-64 and I'd like to send a patch.
This patch is the diff from CVS head.
http://shinh.skr.jp/tmp/tinycc_x86_64.patch.gz
I'd really like to see this being split.
One could make one big patch for those Elf32_x - ElfW(x)
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 05:05:09PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
On Thursday 12 March 2009 16:20:28 Marc Andre Tanner wrote:
grischka and Daniel you are the ones who actually committed code during the
last few months, what do you think?
I'm fine with whatever RCS is used.
It's not like I touch
On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 04:09:32PM +0200, grischka wrote:
which looks like it could be typos. Daniel?
You are right, this is broken in several ways.
I must have had a bad day.
It is fixed in mob.
Daniel
___
Tinycc-devel mailing list
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 09:41:17AM +0200, Francesco Turci wrote:
tcc.c: In function ?rt_get_caller_pc?:
tcc.c:9865: error: request for member ?gregs? in something not a
structure or union
Could you test the attached patch?
I don't have a Mac to test on.
I based the patch on this mail:
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 05:06:47PM +, fsw...@comcast.net wrote:
tcc_compile_string(s, int main(){printf(Hello World!);return 0;}\n);
How about
tcc_compile_string(s, int main(){printf(\Hello World!\);return 0;}\n);
?
Daniel
___
Tinycc-devel
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 10:27:00AM +0200, Frédéric Feret wrote:
I also saw in this thread:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/tinycc-devel/2006-09/msg5.html
that Daniel
had written an ARM assembler for TCC, but I can't find nor in
tinycc/daniel.git, or on its website. It is
possible to
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:44:14AM +0200, Frédéric Feret wrote:
Here's my TCC patches.
I will try to push these modifications on the mob branch.
--- tcc.orig/tcc.h 2009-07-18 22:08:01.0 +0200
+++ tcc/tcc.h 2009-08-25 22:54:49.41750 +0200
@@ -118,8 +118,7 @@
#endif
/*
On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 03:03:52AM +0800, Nyan Htoo Tin wrote:
printf(sizeof buf + 0 = %u\n,sizeof(buf+0));
Fixed in mob branch
Daniel
___
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:56:12AM +0300, Robert Starr wrote:
Problem is that crti.o and crtn.o aren't even present in this build.
crti.o and crtn.o are provided by the glibc-devel package.
Are you compiling for x86_64 targets? Then they are in /usr/lib64.
Daniel
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 11:30:51AM +0100, pancake wrote:
this code doesnt compiles with gcc ,the bug is because tcc allows to
compile such expressions?
a.c:10: error: invalid use of array with unspecified bounds
a.c:10: error: invalid use of array with unspecified bounds
I have a patch that
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 11:18:44PM +0300, Timo VJ Lähde wrote:
Is TinyCC ARM prolog :
mov ip, sp
stmdb sp!, {fp, ip, lr}
add fp, sp, #C
compatible with this ?
From Microsoft http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms254231.aspx
Probably not. I never thought of making it compatible with
On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 07:53:24AM -0700, Gustavo Bruzza wrote:
*a.c:11: error: ';' expected (got .Luid)*. I hope someone can point my
mistake or confirm this as a bug.
This is a known bug.
For now I have reverted the offending commit in mob.
Daniel
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 01:13:33AM +0200, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
tcc tests fails to run on armel debian build daemon and it doesn't seems like
a debian specific issue as I got a can't relocate at value x message. See
Hi,
while trying to get TinyCC to link to Debian sid's armel libraries, I've
encountered a problem with weak symbols. The situation is as follows:
- crti.o contains a R_ARM_PLT32 and R_ARM_GOT32 relocation to the weak
undefined symbol __gmon_start__
- no library defines this symbol
- TinyCC
Before I commit the following patch as fix, can somebody please look
over it for side effects?
The patch marks all undefined weak symbols found in external libraries
as strong. The value of all remaining weak symbols is set to zero just
before the section is output.
If this approach is correct,
On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 04:56:36PM +0800, Bin Shi wrote:
On linux platform, what c library is used by tcc ?
Is it glibc ?
Looking at the code:
on EABI ARM and x86_64 glibc
else uClibc if it is available
else glibc
If so, which version is used by tcc-0.9.25?
glibc 2.x
Is there some
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 04:14:43PM +0800, Bin Shi wrote:
1. I can compile tcc with gcc, but failed with tcc it self
(--cc=/tcc/bin/tcc), how to fix it?
the error message is listed as follow:
/tcc/bin/tcc -o tcc tcc.o libtcc.a -lm -ldl
tcc: error: undefined symbol '__divdi3'
tcc: error:
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 12:08:55AM +0200, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
I've been reading arm-gen.c lately and was a bit surprised by some code
related to struct and float (including double and long double) parameter
passing in gfunc_call. It's probably just a mistake from my reading in
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 12:14:58AM +0100, grischka wrote:
Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
Similar bug happens for i386 for example with
double bar(double a, double b, double c, double d);
double foo (double *p)
{
return bar(p[1], p[2], p[3], p[4]);
}
which
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 11:30:54AM +0100, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
Shouldn't the same fix (Cf attached file) be applied for x86-64?
Yes you are right, x86-64 needs fixing as well.
As I'm not sure about the answer I didn't dare to commit the change.
It needs to be modified a little, as load
Hi Thomas,
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 03:42:47PM +0200, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
I added support for arm hardfloat calling convention (standard variant in
AAPCS) and I would appreciate some feedback on the patch.
there I was thinking that no one (including myself) would ever be able
to
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 10:49:35PM +0200, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
I might be able to give you an access to a Debian porterbox. Would you be
interested?
Thanks, but no.
These days I don't do that much TinyCC related in my spare time.
Daniel
___
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 09:15:52AM +0200, Michael Matz wrote:
Thomas: as you were last fiddling with arm, you might want to check
if the test works on it. The other alloca testcase is #ifdef'ed on
i386 and x86_64, but that only makes sense if alloca really isn't
supported on arm, which I
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 08:03:24PM +0200, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
Le dimanche 10 juin 2012 20:01:11, Michael Matz a écrit :
but we don't build a libtcc1 for ARM
... I think we should do so then. As it seems the various arithmetic
routines of libtcc1.c aren't needed on arm it would
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 09:38:22PM +0200, Didier Barvaux wrote:
Please send your patch, it may be better than mine. Or maybe we can
create a third patch from ours and mine.
By the way, ARM describes how to bit-fields should be laid out in
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 01:14:57PM +0300, Oleg N. Cher wrote:
Do you know Total Commander by /Christian Ghisler? /It is very
powerful and widely functional product which is able to many
possibilities. Its author is not specifically to save the code size,
but the size of distribution is
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 04:18:00PM +0100, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
Le mercredi 7 novembre 2012 16:09:51, Milutin Jovanović a écrit :
Other then that, looks OK to me. BTW, I did not check correctness, just
reviewed the style and logic.
Don't worry for the correctness. GOT needs to be
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 09:43:33PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
tcc first saves r0 r1, and only then fp:
$ ./arm-eabi-tcc -c y.c
$ arm-linux-gnueabi-objdump -d y.o
f:
0: e1a0c00dmov ip, sp
4: e92d0003push{r0, r1}
8:
Hi,
should be fixed in mob now, please test.
Daniel
___
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 10:14:16PM +0100, Christian Jullien wrote:
Wrong double - int conversion when double is 0
Should be fixed as well now.
Same type of error. Must have had a bad day.
Daniel
___
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 07:46:08AM +0100, Christian Jullien wrote:
I'm still looking in ISO standard if there is a note on this conversion.
Anyway, tcc behaves differently from gcc (and *all* other compiler I know
where is conversion truncates) while tcc rounds
it's specified in
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 09:51:04AM +0100, Christian JULLIEN wrote:
Now my complete OpenLisp shows only ONE bug related to utf8 conversion
(probably signed/unsigned char/int issue).
keep in mind that on ARM plain char is unsigned.
Daniel
___
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 01:47:46PM +0100, Christian JULLIEN wrote:
your mail client produced a multipart/alternative with an empty
text/plain part.
The error is in gfunc_prolog when it does
pn = (pn + (align-1)/4) -(align/4);
while align is 4.
Thomas, is the correct fix to clamp
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 11:05:59AM -0800, John Refling wrote:
Just curious though, where would developers go to find information specific
to tinycc like this?
I'd like to learn more of the tinycc details. Is there a list of all the
tinycc extensions somewhere?
The truth is that your
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 12:31:11AM +0100, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
The compiler I normally use is GCC, which has no problems about linking
these files.
Unless you compile with -fno-common
Header files have this:
/*extern*/ nbworks_do_align_t nbworks_do_align;
It is bad practice to have
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 01:01:10PM -0700, Austin English wrote:
manually correcting that, I'm able to preprocess the problematic file down to:
austin@debian-home:~/src/wine-tcc/dlls/d3d8/tests$ cat stateblock.i.tcc.c
typedef struct _D3DVECTOR
{
float x;
float y;
float z;
} D3DMATRIX;
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 06:00:17PM +0200, ggasnie...@free.fr wrote:
Are there people working on the feature ?
For this long-term feature, what are the main aspects of TCC to
understand before going forward ?
What do you miss in the current TCC ARM code generator?
Daniel
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:15:29PM +0200, ggasnie...@free.fr wrote:
So where could I find the supported ARM architecture
The generated code should be compatible with ARMv4.
Floating point hardware or emulator (either FPA or VFP) is a must.
and what is the roadmap for it ?
There is no central
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 01:11:42PM +0200, Armin Steinhoff wrote:
libtcc1.c doesn't compile for ARMv7 :)
libtcc1.c doesn't contain the functions needed for ARM.
Daniel
___
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 04:05:24PM +0200, Christian JULLIEN wrote:
Wouah!
Do you mean you're implementing eabi_ functions for ARM (such as div and
mod ?)
Total respect!!
I once had an incomplete libtcc1 on my homepage, where I used a division
function from GMP. It could not be compiled
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 08:27:25PM +0100, James Lyon wrote:
I think that ARM should use a hidden pointer to return
the data in ret_2float_test, but reading the ARM EABI spec a
structure with 2 floats in might count as a 64-bit containerized
vector and thus would be returned in r0 and r1. In
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:58:39PM +0200, Daniel Glöckner wrote:
And I am not happy that is_fconst() apparently does not work.
Scratch that. is_fconst() is for FPA an the VMOV (imm) instruction
I saw in the output of GCC is VFPv3.
Daniel
___
Tinycc
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 03:40:43PM +0200, grischka wrote:
So the questions is: Do you people want, is it possible, what
would it take - to change our tinycc code's license from LGPL
to a BSD-like one (such as below).
Please discuss.
I don't see anything good coming from a change from LGPL
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 05:43:03PM +0200, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
As I already said privately, I'm fine with BSD-2-clause.
Does that mean you prefer it over the LGPL?
What about you, grischka? Which one do you prefer?
Daniel
___
Tinycc-devel
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 07:07:34PM +0200, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
Mmmmh. Overall I'm more a (A|L)GPL guy but I choose different license for
different project. For tcc I thought it could make sense since we have only
libtcc has static lib and many people seem to build stuff around it.
And
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 09:14:58PM +0200, Marc Andre Tanner wrote:
The fear of proprietary forks seems
unfounded because there is already a mature BSD licensed C compiler
(clang) available for people to base their work on.
Let's see..
$ size /opt/llvm/bin/clang
textdata bss
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:58:39PM +0200, Daniel Glöckner wrote:
There are two things broken in the code generated by TCC:
First of all TCC thinks it has to return the structure in
memory pointed to by r0 and second it gets confused about where
it stored r0 and instead reads the first float
Hi Thomas,
I saw that you used the following line to store the floating point
arguments that have been passed in fpu register:
o(0xED2D0A00|nf); /* save s0-s15 on stack if needed */
In my 2nd edition ARM ARM this maps to the FSTMS instruction and there
is a note allowing implementations to
Hi Christian,
On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 04:44:09PM +0200, Christian Jullien wrote:
ARM hardfloat: fix struct return with float/double args
Fixes the case where the structure is not returned in registers.
I thought it was related to ret_2float_test
At least on Rpi I still have:
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 07:12:50PM +0200, Daniel Glöckner wrote:
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 07:07:34PM +0200, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
Mmmmh. Overall I'm more a (A|L)GPL guy but I choose different license for
different project. For tcc I thought it could make sense since we have only
libtcc
On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 05:02:54PM +0200, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
Le mercredi 1 mai 2013 16:59:25, Daniel Glöckner a écrit :
In my 2nd edition ARM ARM this maps to the FSTMS instruction and there
is a note allowing implementations to keep the values in an internal
representation and just
Hi Rune,
On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 10:37:58AM +, u-tcc-u...@aetey.se wrote:
From my perspective I'd like to skip the additional worry about which
programs can be linked to which libraries and how.
if you are a packager, why do you have to worry about that?
I mean, if you still have the
On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 01:02:19PM +0200, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
Do you know where big-endian is used and by who? There once was a port of
Debian for ARM big endian but it never got much traction so it seems to me
there is not much interest for such a port anyway.
No, I don't think I've
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 05:26:05AM +0530, Sherjil Ozair wrote:
Could anyone direct me to the fastest TCC version that is there right now
for compile-time?
I downloaded 0.9.26 from http://bellard.org/tcc/. Is this the fastest one?
I expect not, since this is quite an old version.
That's a
On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 08:37:22PM +0100, James Lyon wrote:
It appears to add CPATH and C_INCLUDE_PATH to the header search path
and LIBRARY_PATH to the linker search. I've not used this mechanism
though.
The code for this was added with 0ad857c80e1 after 0.9.26.
0.9.25 didn't use environment
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 03:40:15PM -0500, Cayce Pollard wrote:
./../tinycc/tccpp.c:1961: error: undefined reference to 'strtold'
Just substitute strtod for strtold.
It has probably been omitted from Android's libc because
long double == double on ARM nowadays (i.e. with EABI or VFP).
Daniel
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 08:26:31PM -0500, Cayce Pollard wrote:
Also, would that work for linking __clear_cache to the Android equivalent
cacheflush?
I would prefer directly using the __ARM_NR_cacheflush syscall to
make it work on non-Bionic Linux as well. The syscall has been introduced
into
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 07:07:38AM -0500, Cayce Pollard wrote:
tcc: error: file '/project/arm-cc/sysroot/lib//libgcc_s.so.1' not found
tcc: error: undefined symbol '__divsi3'
tcc: error: undefined symbol '__modsi3'
tcc: error: undefined symbol '__aeabi_uidiv'
tcc: error: undefined symbol
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 06:49:05PM +0200, Yann Collet wrote:
- Is it even an objective for TCC to generate small-size exe ?
No, Wikipedia refers to the size of the compiler, not to the size of the
output.
Have you tried GCC's -Os switch?
On very small executables padding added by the linker
Hi Jason,
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 03:39:45PM +1000, Jason Hood wrote:
* 4- 8-byte structs copy as int/long long (all targets);
did you check if the structure is aligned to a multiple of 4 bytes?
Otherwise it will crash on ARM.
Daniel
___
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 11:21:19AM +1000, Jason Hood wrote:
On 26/09/2013 16:30, Daniel Glöckner wrote:
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 03:39:45PM +1000, Jason Hood wrote:
* 4- 8-byte structs copy as int/long long (all targets);
did you check if the structure is aligned to a multiple of 4 bytes
On Sun, Nov 03, 2013 at 12:09:32PM -0800, Steven G. Messervey wrote:
mob-branch, configured with --with-libgcc only, debian squeeze 32-bit:
tcc: error: undefined symbol '__tcc_fpinit'
tcc: error: undefined symbol '__tcc_cvt_ftol'
--with-libgcc uses libgcc instead of libtcc1.
This will of
Hi Christian,
On Sat, Jan 04, 2014 at 10:46:15AM +0100, Christian Jullien wrote:
If I understand you well, you want to change RELICENSING file
From
Daniel Glöckner? arm-gen.c
To
Daniel GlöcknerNO arm-gen.c
done.
What can we do
1 - 100 of 159 matches
Mail list logo
