Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #167539
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler |
| Date | 2022-09-07 21:03 +0100 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <tfate1$r6$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | (8 earlier) <87leqv87t2.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <tfahhl$h2r$1@gioia.aioe.org> <87fsh386ze.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <tfanqb$1gk1$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735d380ta.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
On 07/09/2022 20:02, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > >> On 07/09/2022 17:49, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >>> Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >>> >>>> On 07/09/2022 17:31, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >>>>> Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >>> >>>>>> Just supporting '$' anyway would be a one-line change in the tcc >>>>>> source code (although that only fixed my copy of it when I tried it). >>>>> >>>>> Or a zero line change if you use that option. >>>> >>>> But all build instructions for every user for every project that >>>> depends on '$' would forever more need to include >>>> '-fdollars-in-identifiers'. IMV that was the wrong choice. >>> But you don't think using IDs with non-standard characters might also >>> have been a poor choice? >> >> The dollar symbols come up when transpiling to C code from syntax that >> uses $, for example, to represent fully names since C lacks >> namespaces, or for special identifiers. >> >> There, $ was considered a better and more visible and obvious >> indicator of a special identifier than underscore. >> >> Underscores suffer from poor visibility; consecutive underscore can >> appear to run together depending on font; and they are also popular as >> separators in user-identifiers, creating a bit more confusion. > > So no, you consider it a good choose. So good, in fact, that you are > happy to exclude tcc from being used as the C compiler. But adding a > line to the documentation to say "add -fdollars-in-identifiers when > using tcc" is too much. > I supported Tcc but I needed to translate names using $ into something that is acceptable. That sort of worked, but gave less readable, longer, more unsatisfactory output. The advantage is that it doesn't need to be mentioned in build docs: gcc linux: gcc prog.c -oprog -lm -ldl tcc linux: tcc prog.c -oprog -lm -ldl -fdollars-in-identifiers gcc windows: gcc prog.c -oprog.exe tcc windows: tcc prog.c -luser32 -fdollars-in-identifiers bcc windows: bcc prog It sort of sticks out doesn't it. Also, gcc gets away with allowing $ by default; tcc generally copies gcc in terms of how a compiler is invoked, so this surprisingly goes against that.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2022-08-18 18:44 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@example.invalid> - 2022-09-06 02:48 -0400
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2022-09-06 10:08 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2022-09-07 12:27 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2022-09-07 05:45 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-07 15:35 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-09-07 16:38 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-07 17:04 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2022-09-07 19:14 +0300
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-09-07 17:31 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-07 17:40 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-09-07 17:49 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-07 19:27 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-09-07 20:02 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-07 21:03 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-09-07 13:52 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-09-14 07:14 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-09-14 10:59 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-09-15 23:46 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-09-07 20:17 +0200
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-09-07 19:58 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-09-07 13:26 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-09-07 23:42 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-09-14 06:45 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-09-14 06:40 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-09-07 10:28 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-09-07 20:05 +0200
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2022-09-07 15:28 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-08 00:51 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2022-09-08 05:20 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-08 16:41 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-09-08 16:43 +0000
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-08 19:23 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2022-09-08 09:59 -0700
csiph-web