As a user of TCC for scientific computing, I would embrace any (even partial) implementations of complex types. From previous threads I had the impression that complex types had no priority since the complex number abstraction can be dealt with using regular functions (although inconvenient, especially for certain functions).
~Mads 2015-11-24 0:19 GMT+01:00 Edmund Grimley Evans < [email protected]>: > This is the last patch I have queued up. It lays the foundations for > complex types but doesn't build anything very useful on them. Some > notes are added in "TODO" explaining how I think complex types could > be implemented, and there's a test added for the bit that is > implemented. > > The first question to ask is whether complex types would be welcome in > TCC. The second question is whether a patch that only implements part > of complex types is worth committing. > > What do people think? > > _______________________________________________ > Tinycc-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel > >
_______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
