Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.c > #147509

Re: memcpy not memcpying?

Subject Re: memcpy not memcpying?
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
References (4 earlier) <lnsgn77bw2.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <ji1vF.1277$FR8.1116@fx45.iad> <qpjrck$o01$1@dont-email.me> <6KfvF.57888$rJ1.57717@fx01.am4> <qpkakk$gq7$1@dont-email.me>
From Bart <bc@freeuk.com>
Message-ID <0DivF.23103$Q26.16540@fx34.am4> (permalink)
Organization virginmedia.com
Date 2019-11-02 17:00 +0000

Show all headers | View raw


On 02/11/2019 16:24, David Brown wrote:
> On 02/11/2019 14:43, Bart wrote:
>> On 02/11/2019 12:04, David Brown wrote:

>>> That's your problem.  Tcc is a compiler, not a full C implementation 
>>> - it uses MS's hopelessly outdated and inefficient C library DLL.
>>
>> So does gcc:
> 
> gcc is a compiler - it needs a library.  tcc is a build of gcc for 
> Windows, which relies on MS's piss-poor C library.  The solution is to 
> get a /decent/ C implementation for Windows - including a good compiler 
> and a good library.  My recommendation is mingw64, which consists of gcc 
> /and/ a good library.
> 
> You /know/ all this.  Why do you continually muddy the waters and 
> attempt to confuse people?

gcc, gnu, mingw, whatever the whole thing is supposed to be called, is a 
monstrosity.

My gcc/tdm installation consists of 666MB of 13,000 files including 900 
lib*.a files, and yet it hasn't bothered to include an up-to-date C 
runtime? It doesn't make sense does it.

Well, OK, let's download this mingw64 (which I thought I already had). 
It describes itself as a "complete runtime environment for gcc to 
support binaries", yet the 450MB, also 13,000-file installation 
confusingly also includes compilers such as gcc.exe and g++.exe. (So is 
it a runtime environment, or a C implementation, or can't it make its 
mind up?)

Anyway I might as well use them. This is the result (after hiding the 
directories of my tdm version) on a modified hello.c:

    C:\mingw\mingw64\bin>type hello.c
     #include <stdio.h>

     int main(void) {
         printf("%zu\n",sizeof(int*));
     }

    C:\mingw\mingw64\bin>gcc hello.c

    C:\mingw\mingw64\bin>a
    zu

Brilliant! So it looks like someone really has to do battle to get this 
%zu thing working.

(Remember we are just printing the value of a u64 number. Some people 
just do want to get drawn in to this entire gnu/gcc/mingw/msys thing; 
they just want to write programs and do things like print numbers.)

-----------------------------------

(This is how it can be done; first let's look at the TWO files involved:

C:\c>dir \windows\system32\msvcrt.dll
16/12/2011  08:46           634,880 msvcrt.dll

C:\c>dir \m\bcc.exe
19/10/2019  23:37           523,776 bcc.exe

Now let's run that first program again, but with a tweak:

    C:\c>type c.c
     #include <stdio.h>
     int main(void) {printf("%?",sizeof(int*));}

    C:\c>bcc c
    Compiling c.c to c.exe

    C:\c>c
    8

See how easy it can be? And this is still using that 'out-dated' 
library! Better yet, how to do it without using printfs at all:

     println ref int.bytes)


> That is the way printf works.  You don't have to like it, but it is not 
> a "gimmick".

The gimmick, or 'hack' which is a better word, is to introduce a 
dedicated format code for a very specific type, which then requires all 
libraries in the world to be revised. Even though there is nothing 
special about that type

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

memcpy not memcpying? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-11-01 08:42 -0400
  Re: memcpy not memcpying? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-11-01 08:49 -0400
    Re: memcpy not memcpying? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-11-01 09:24 -0400
      Re: memcpy not memcpying? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-11-01 09:46 -0400
        Re: memcpy not memcpying? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-11-01 09:49 -0400
        Re: memcpy not memcpying? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-11-01 10:19 -0700
          Re: memcpy not memcpying? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-11-01 21:14 +0100
          Re: memcpy not memcpying? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-11-01 17:16 -0400
            Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-01 22:42 +0000
              Re: memcpy not memcpying? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-11-01 21:10 -0400
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-02 11:36 +0000
            Re: memcpy not memcpying? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-11-02 02:15 -0700
            Re: memcpy not memcpying? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-11-02 13:04 +0100
              Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-02 13:43 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-11-02 17:24 +0100
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-02 17:00 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-11-02 13:06 -0700
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-02 21:05 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-02 22:40 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-11-02 15:59 -0700
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-02 23:47 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-11-02 18:22 -0700
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-03 13:27 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-11-03 17:46 +0100
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-03 17:20 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2019-11-03 19:44 +0100
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-03 19:36 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2019-11-03 22:57 +0100
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-11-03 22:39 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-11-03 23:06 +0100
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-03 23:28 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-11-04 11:00 +0100
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-04 11:14 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-11-04 11:22 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-11-04 13:10 +0100
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-11-04 10:03 -0800
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-11-04 19:36 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-11-05 10:04 -0800
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-11-04 20:58 -0800
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-11-04 22:01 -0800
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Autist <autist69@gmail.com> - 2019-11-04 12:56 +0100
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-11-04 09:50 -0500
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-11-04 20:26 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-11-04 04:34 -0800
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-04 13:05 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-11-04 14:09 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-04 15:11 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-11-04 15:15 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-11-04 15:43 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-03 20:20 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-11-03 14:37 +1300
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-03 11:01 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-11-03 04:03 -0800
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-03 12:52 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-11-03 23:34 -0800
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-04 09:36 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-04 16:20 +0000
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-11-04 07:46 +1300
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-11-03 12:26 -0800
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-11-03 17:31 +0100
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-03 17:05 +0000
              Re: memcpy not memcpying? already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2019-11-03 09:14 -0800
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-11-03 12:32 -0800
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2019-11-03 14:59 -0800
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2019-11-03 15:19 -0800
                Re: memcpy not memcpying? already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2019-11-03 17:00 -0800
          Re: memcpy not memcpying? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-11-02 11:16 -0400
            Re: memcpy not memcpying? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-11-02 17:26 +0100
    Re: memcpy not memcpying? Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@delq.com> - 2019-11-01 06:39 -0700
      Re: memcpy not memcpying? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-11-01 09:56 -0400
        Re: memcpy not memcpying? Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@delq.com> - 2019-11-01 12:39 -0700
    Re: memcpy not memcpying? guinness.tony@gmail.com - 2019-11-01 06:49 -0700
    Re: memcpy not memcpying? jak <nospam@please.ty> - 2019-11-01 20:40 +0100
  Re: memcpy not memcpying? Autist <autist69@gmail.com> - 2019-11-01 14:26 +0100
    Re: memcpy not memcpying? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-11-01 10:22 -0700
    Re: memcpy not memcpying? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-01 19:44 +0000
      Re: memcpy not memcpying? Autist <autist69@gmail.com> - 2019-11-01 21:31 +0100
  Re: memcpy not memcpying? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-11-01 09:39 -0400
    Re: memcpy not memcpying? Autist <autist69@gmail.com> - 2019-11-01 14:42 +0100
      Re: memcpy not memcpying? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-11-01 09:48 -0400
  Re: memcpy not memcpying? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-11-01 06:47 -0700
    Re: memcpy not memcpying? Autist <autist69@gmail.com> - 2019-11-01 14:58 +0100
      Re: memcpy not memcpying? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-11-01 10:22 -0400
        Re: memcpy not memcpying? Autist <autist69@gmail.com> - 2019-11-01 18:38 +0100
          Re: memcpy not memcpying? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-11-01 17:54 +0000
            Re: memcpy not memcpying? Autist <autist69@gmail.com> - 2019-11-01 20:24 +0100
          Re: memcpy not memcpying? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-11-01 15:24 -0400
        Re: memcpy not memcpying? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-11-01 23:19 +0000

csiph-web