Path: csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Tim Rentsch Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: bart cc32n.c Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 16:41:37 -0800 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 29 Message-ID: <86v87bbqke.fsf@linuxsc.com> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e3f3945cb7164e1654b6d005c9df0f57"; logging-data="727571"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+q7QQDbMyZK5+ySJetHvpYRO7MhswQtAE=" User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:roAa2TWjnpkrMGI4Wpf+gOxww10= sha1:FyJ+9thyK3Etymr3eKOS2Jtz8rM= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:381207 Paul Edwards writes: [..is the code in cc32n.c topical?..] > I have a different opinion about whether a > C compiler written in C is on-topic in a C > support forum. Any program written in C, whether or not it's a compiler, is topical in comp.lang.c. Unfortunately neither cc32n.c nor cc64.c is written in C. Rather they are written in a language that resembles C, and may even be compilable by some "C" compilers in a non-conforming mode, but they are not written in standard C. If you want help with one of these programs, and want to get it in this newsgroup, get the code to compile under, for example, gcc -std=c99 -pedantic-errors or gcc -std=c11 -pedantic-errors. Until that is done people are quite right to tell you to look for help elsewhere. Moreover, the code in these programs is a disaster. No sensible person would spend any time on it if they have a choice. If you want to waste your time on it, that's up to you. I don't see any incentive for anyone else to spend any time on it at all, except perhaps as a learning exercise to see how truly awful bad code can be. It's easy to believe no one wants to take credit for this mess.