On 5/22/06, ice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Didn't early C++ compilers just translate the code to C?
Yes. This basically means that the C++-compiler is a front-end using C as the intermediate language. This approach presents several problems, some of which didn't exist in the early days: * Implementing the standard C++ ABI - if you don't to this, you can't link against any libraries not compiled with your compiler. * Template metaprogramming is non-trivial to implement. * If something goes wrong in the C compilation step or in the linking, making the error messages make sense is _very_ hard.
On 5/22/06, PerfectDark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Is there any work somewhere to make a C++ compiler on top of tcc ? > > It is a hard, VERY hard work - to implement full ISO-compliant C++ compiler(just look to gcc::cp code :) ) and, I think, it absolutely unuseful. Except excellent gcc C++ compiler, there are a lot of free compilers, even microsoft offer fast and free C/C++ compiler+PlatformSDK. I sure, that tcc should be stable, small, simple, fast and reliable C compiler (may be with simple and useful extensions - thanks to Ben Hinkle :) ) - with possibility to use as internal runtime C compiler ( I work on win32 and I HATE VisualBasic :) ). > > > _______________________________________________ > Tinycc-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel > -- 43rd Law Of Computing: Anything that can go wro <br> <br> sig: segmentation fault: core dumped _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
-- Axel _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
