Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #389161
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: question about linker |
| Date | 2024-11-27 21:06 -0800 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <86r06wosk5.fsf@linuxsc.com> (permalink) |
| References | <vi54e9$3ie0o$1@dont-email.me> <vi56tj$3ip1o$1@dont-email.me> <vi583f$3ie0o$3@dont-email.me> <vi59df$3ip1o$3@dont-email.me> <vi5qu0$3md4n$1@dont-email.me> |
Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > On 26/11/2024 20:00, Bart wrote: > >> On 26/11/2024 19:38, Thiago Adams wrote: >> >>> Do you have any idea what else can be simplified when creating a C >>> compiler? >> >> What are you asking; are you thinking of writing one? Because C >> compilers already exist! >> >> If so, think of what you would find troublesome. I could create a >> long list of things that makes C harder to compile than my own >> language. > > Since BGB posted a list, here's mine; it is not exhaustive: > > > Hard C Features > > [...] Most of the items on your list are not really very hard. Some are rather tedious, and some are something of a pain in the ass, but that doesn't make implementing them hard; just tedious.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next | Find similar
Re: question about linker Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-11-27 21:06 -0800
csiph-web