On 11/21/24 14:39, Domingo Alvarez Duarte wrote:
Thanks fo reply !
Again even if it's valid C code it's clear that it has several drawbacks
pointed so far by other comments on this thread and if there is a more
clean/clear/elegant way to express it why not talk/try it out ?
For sure the drawback is that it will stop to work when tcc reaches
0.9.100 say in the year 2240 (given a release cycle of 3 years on
average ;)
Cheers !
On 21/11/24 14:36, avih via Tinycc-devel wrote:
Fow what it's worth, when compiling with clang, the "configure" script
adds to the compiler flag:
-Wno-string-plus-int
exactly to suppress this warning, because it's stupid, and it's valid
C code, and the developers of tcc know that string + int is adding to
the pointer and not to the number inside that string.
So maybe whatever compiler which produces this warning can add support
for this flag, and tcc configure can be updated to use this flag with
this compiler as well (in addition to clang).
On Thursday, November 21, 2024 at 12:05:20 PM GMT+2, ian
<menea...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi
#define TCC_VERSION_MAJOR "0.9."🤣
0 is the major version, 9 is a subversion, 28 is the minor version.
If you wanna have clear code :
#define TCC_VERSION_MAJOR "0"#define TCC_VERSION_SUB ".9"#define
TCC_VERSION_MINOR ".28"#define TCC_RELEASE_CANDIDATE "rc"#define
TCC_VERSION TCC_VERSION_MAJOR TCC_VERSION_SUB TCC_VERSION_MINOR
TCC_RELEASE_CANDIDATE
is better ...
And as I said earlier :
Maybe should « "zig cc" (clang 18) » preprocessor handle in a smarter
way things like DEFINED_STUFF + CONST_VALUE ?
Regards,
ian
Le 21/11/2024 à 10:25, Domingo Alvarez Duarte a écrit :
#define TCC_VERSION_MAJOR "0.9."
_______________________________________________
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
_______________________________________________
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
