Le mercredi 5 février 2014, 08:56:49 Christian JULLIEN a écrit : > Hi Thomas, > > About signess, C standard permits an implementation to choose what it > prefers. To me, tcc should used the same sign as the default sign used by > boostrap compiler (and of course tests should test the same) For example, > an ARM board A, for some good reason, can choose signed char while ARM > board B can choose unsigned char by default. In this case, the associated > gcc compiler on those boards are certainly be configured with A or B > default sign. > > When boostraping tcc with gcc, the resulting tcc should have the same char > sign as default for gcc options used for boostrap. Hence, tcc configuration > boostrap should ask the sign of char to bootstraping compiler (e.g. gcc but > may also be clang or whatever).
Makes sense. > > tcc should also honnor -fsigned-char or -funsigned-char option (gcc > compatible) to change char default sign. There is already such an option at least. > > Finally, tcc ./configure should include --char-sign=signed/unsigned to force > a specific mode. That would be for later :) For now I need to see first why when CHAR_IS_UNSIGNED is not defined I have a bigger diff and then start adding the detection of the signedness of the boostraping compiler. Cheers, Thomas _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
