Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!usenet.ukfsn.org!not-for-mail From: Martin Gregorie Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2011 17:24:18 +0000 (UTC) Organization: UK Free Software Network Lines: 37 Message-ID: References: <3uuf071k5c0b32cdlv31s7p1u6cjn3t11j@4ax.com> <71ph07l246l93uf4umn5tjgp6dtfgnr4a9@4ax.com> <4e28c7a0$0$308$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <4e2ae67d$0$303$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> NNTP-Posting-Host: 84.45.235.129 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: localhost.localdomain 1311441858 25748 84.45.235.129 (23 Jul 2011 17:24:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@localhost.localdomain NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2011 17:24:18 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Pan/0.133 (House of Butterflies) Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:6468 On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 11:19:19 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote: > On 7/23/2011 9:19 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote: >> The last C compilers I remember that had separate preprocessors were >> K&R, so were very old. In these, cc was effectively a shell that >> invoked the preprocessor, the C --> assembler translator, the >> assembler and the linker in turn. Actually, I'm still using one - the >> standard OS/9 v2.4 C compiler, which dates from 1992 and runs on 68xxx >> hardware. >> >> I don't remember any ANSI C compilers I've used being structured this >> way: certainly I've not seen any version of the GNU compiler or its >> derivatives that aren't a monolithic chunk that includes all >> compilation stages except the linker. AFAICR this also applied to the >> Borland compilers. >> >> So, if that's really what you want, go and find a old K&R compiler or >> its source. > > GCC still has a separate executable for preprocessing! > > The driver gcc or g++ calls cpp, cc1 or cc1plus, as and ld. > Fair cop, guv. I looked at /usr/bin, thought the preprocessor was called cpre so didn't find it and glanced through 'man gcc' but didn't find anything describing the compiler structure. The fact that the options are subdivided onto compilation stages doesn't necessarily say anything about the compiler physical structure, and as gcc is fairly big, I assumed.... -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org |