Le mercredi 5 février 2014, 17:58:11 Thomas Preud'homme a écrit : > Le mercredi 5 février 2014, 10:55:44 Daniel Glöckner a écrit : > > Hi Thomas, > > > > On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 02:15:07PM +0800, Thomas Preud'homme wrote: > > > I would like to fix this but I need to see first why tcc and gcc differ. > > > Daniel, if you read this, can you explain me why gcc seems to use a > > > signed > > > char while tcc uses an unsigned char? > > > > it seems char, signed char, and unsigned char are distinct types in C. > > With GCC neither unsigned char nor signed char is compatible with char. > > Oh I see. Well, there is already a VT_SIGNED in tcc.h and it isn't much > used. It could serve just that purpose.
I changed VT_SIGNED in VT_DEFSIGN to indicate if the signed used is the default one or one that was explicitely given. This way I can see if an unsigned char is unsigned because of no signeness specifier or because it was declared as unsigned char. Now arm runs the full test suite without any error with both libgcc and libtcc, yeah \o/ I noticed while testing the code that there is 2 errors on i386 with the current mob tcc, not due to latest commits. I'd like to debug this and then launch a call for testing for tcc 0.9.27 but I'm not well versed in x86 these days so if anybody want to try, please do. Best regards, Thomas _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
