On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 11:34 AM Michael Ackermann via Tinycc-devel < [email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, > > i'll try to summarize a few notes concerning C99 _Complex first: > > - with C11 it was designated an _optional_ core language feature again; > in principle i do feel _Complex is non-orthogonal to C-language at the > abstraction layer of C language > - of cause complex numbers are important, question is if those should > become > a core language-feature of C itself hence > - there certainly are other options to implement complex numbers such as > some > dedicated math-library (would be curious myself which those are); > and what would any benefit of _Complex be over any dedicated math > library? > - another motivation to implement _Complex language extension regardless > seems > musl-libc for example by default relies upon it, but this can easily be > patched without extending tinycc compiler and won't cause any trouble > anywhere then (i'm maintaining such a musl-libc and userspace fork here > to > backport onto linux-tcc/musl for example, absense of _Complex was a > non-issue so far, and when complex numbers are required i would be > curious > which math libraries existed to implement them where those belong) > - it's important to consider the trade-off between language features > supported > and complexity of tinycc compiler; obviously tinycc is intended to be > tiny > by design and i do not know how much _Complex extension would add to the > belly > of tinycc (there is many other gigantic heavy-weight toolchains such as > gcc or llvm/clang with dozens of millions of lines of code which do > implement it) > > Long story short, of cause _Complex implementation is an interesting topic, > given the importance of this with signal processing etc, > but i tend to think tinycc may not be the playground for it. > > Hope i'm not in error with this judgement, feedback appreciated if any. > > Michael > > On 2026-08-12 21:51, [email protected] wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I was wondering if any has attempted or started to work out > > implementing _Complex? > > > > If not I would like to attempt it 😊 > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Go for it, but if your implementation is too intrusive, peoples here might not like it. Then you can post your implementation here, and ask for review. Worst case senario, you'll learn a little more about compiler and _Complex. Matthias > > > > Jordan > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 >
_______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
