Ok, what exact parts do you suggest to change? For now I see that dropping
__cplusplus guards should make the code C++-free; please, correct me if I'm
wrong.

ср, 27 янв. 2021 г., 01:29 Kyryl Melekhin <k.melek...@gmail.com>:

> Dmitry Selyutin <ghostman...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Except to the extent which they're not, which is clear from the fact
> that
> > I was able to recognize that as clang's header.
> >
> > I don't object to marking it as clang-derived. I can also copy the
> > copyright notice.
> >
> > > Why should the Tiny _C_ Compiler's headers be compatible with c++?
> >
> > Because this is the direction which will most certainly be reflected in
> the
> > future standards, in C++ for sure. If it's not difficult to keep it
> > compatible, I don't see why it should not be compatible. I cannot predict
> > how and why this header can be re-used, though.
>
> C++ support statements should be avoided simply because
> it is not consistent to the rest of the codebase. If you want to
> build it with cpp compiler having that one file is pointless.
> Nothing will work anyways. Also gcc now depends on c++ which
> I think was their greatest mistake and downfall. Please don't
> make this happen with tcc.
>
_______________________________________________
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel

Reply via email to