On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 12:34 AM, Rob <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks for that - i'm happy to accept a picky answer :). i have since > found > > that i need to use a typecast for this type of case with gcc, anyway, so > > i'm refactoring now. > > Why's that the case? Just curious, from what I could tell gcc accepts > function > pointers there just fine. >
The error message (from gcc) was that we were casting incompatible types. Both had the same signature, but didn't use a typedef to represent that. It seems to me to be a buggy corner case in gcc, but it was easy to please by replacing the duplicated function signature code with a prettier typedef. > Yeah - a typedef is much better than what I proposed. > tcc accepts it fine here. > sqlite4 now compiles just fine with tcc on x64 (and blazing fast - about 8x faster than gcc), but... the test suite crashes on tcc and i don't know why. i hope to take a look at that as the v4 tree stabilizes somewhat (it's very much pre-beta right now). -- ----- stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ http://gplus.to/sgbeal
_______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
