Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.lightlink.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED!nerds-end From: alexfrunews@gmail.com Newsgroups: comp.compilers Subject: Re: Smaller C Compiler Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2015 07:17:50 -0700 (PDT) Organization: Compilers Central Lines: 22 Sender: news@iecc.com Approved: comp.compilers@iecc.com Message-ID: <15-06-007@comp.compilers> References: <15-06-005@comp.compilers> <15-06-006@comp.compilers> NNTP-Posting-Host: news.iecc.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: miucha.iecc.com 1434903947 51083 2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970 (21 Jun 2015 16:25:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@iecc.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2015 16:25:47 +0000 (UTC) Keywords: debug Posted-Date: 21 Jun 2015 12:25:47 EDT X-submission-address: compilers@iecc.com X-moderator-address: compilers-request@iecc.com X-FAQ-and-archives: http://compilers.iecc.com Xref: csiph.com comp.compilers:1563 On Friday, June 19, 2015 at 9:30:47 AM UTC-7, Gene Wirchenko wrote: ... > >Self-hosing on and Cross-compiling for: > ^^^^^^^^^^^ > I take it that it does not include a debugger. It's only self-hos(t)ing, not self-debugging. But there exist decent/usable debuggers for DOS, Windows and Linux, which you could use to debug it or programs compiled with it. The latter might be a little hardcore since there's no symbol/debug info in the executables produced by the compiler's linker. But map files are generated by the linker and the compiler outputs assembly code with annotations and so matching disassembly in, say, gdb with the assembly code and ultimately with the source code is quite feasible. I guess, yet another debugger could only have value if it's either somehow better than the existing ones (e.g. richer or better suites this compiler) or is also very small, like the compiler itself. Does "" mean that you're begging for yet another one? If so, why? Alex