[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Tinycc-devel] Merging patches...

From: Rob Landley
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] Merging patches...
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 19:34:12 -0400
User-agent: KMail/1.9.1

On Monday 09 October 2006 5:17 pm, Daniel Glöckner wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 03:53:28PM -0400, Rob Landley wrote:
> > Is that the only one that needs per-arch tweaking?
> Let's see...
> The c67 target can pass only simple values <= 4 bytes to functions and has
> no code to handle the variable arguments passed in registers.
> The il target is too abstract to deal with stack alignment.
> Does it even compile?
> Did I miss any target?

Well, I was also thinking "does anything else out stdarg.h vary per-platform".  
(I dunno.  va_copy and va_end look fairly straightforward, but is rounding up 
to 4 is good for va_start for everybody?)

> > (Is there some "I 
> > am currently building for this architecture" #ifdef I can check?
> See tcc_new()
> TCC_TARGET_I386 defines __i386__
> TCC_TARGET_ARM defines __arm__


> The Scratchbox GCC ARM EABI cross compiler defines __ARM_EABI__ to 1.
> We could do so as well.

> Btw., I have 3 years of tinycc-devel on my mailserver that I could send you.

Cool!  Yes please.  Before that, I suspect that fabrice had it under control.  
The first release of qemu was in may 2003:


Before that (and for a while after), Fabrice had plenty of time for tcc, so 
I'd expect any dropped patches before then to be for a reason.  It's the last 
couple years (since qemu made it big) that's the trouble...

"Perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add, but when 
there is no longer anything to take away." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]