Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

Smaller C compiler (Announce)

posted by alexfru(R), USA, 17.06.2016, 10:36

> > > > What I really (still!) need is a preprocessor.
> >
> > > You mention Plan9/LCC, but isn't LCC different? Plan9 has its own
> > compiler.
> >
> > The compiler proper is different. But the LCC authors borrowed the
> > preprocessor from Plan9
> Ah, I had forgotten (since I've never used Plan9) that they were a bit
> different. So yeah, perhaps by default they didn't need (or want) a "full"
> preprocessor, hence the POSIX environment add-on.

I'm not sure what you're talking about. There's not much of POSIX in the preprocessor, just file handles and open()/read()/etc instead of FILE* and fopen()/fgetc()/etc, which is the easiest thing to clean up and standardize w.r.t. ANSI C. In terms of functionality there's almost no difference as far as I can tell by looking at the diff (most notably, wide chars, Unicode and variadic macros (..., __VA_ARGS__) have been removed). But it looks like they've done some valuable cleanup as well.

> > > Though LCC does allegedly use dmr's CPP (or so I thought). Yeah, LCC
> > > license sucks.
> >
> > I wonder if the LCC guys would agree to explicitly license their version
> of
> > the preprocessor as GPL as well (they don't have to, but it would be nice
> =
> > less work for me or for someone else adapting the code again).
> Like I said, Plan9 is dual-licensed these days, so maybe it already is
> okay. But maybe not. Hopefully so, but then again, if LCC itself still (!)
> isn't OSI or FSF friendly, then it's unlikely they'll ever care.

I don't think licenses can travel backwards and then forward again in time. The diff between LCC and Plan9 is not GPL'd.

> > > I would even suggest (T)ACK, but I don't see a separate CPP binary
> > there.
> >
> > There was something I didn't like about ACK.
> Well, if the cpp isn't a separate utility, it's probably useless for your
> needs. But that one guy did finally make a new pre-release a week or so
> ago. The big change now is using ordinary makefiles (instead of Prime Mover
> [Lua]), maybe that's what you meant??

Nopes. Just looked at it again. It needs additional tools to compile besides the C compiler.



Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
15725 Postings in 1440 Threads, 261 registered users, 8 users online (0 registered, 8 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum