Re: [Tinycc-devel] Re : Calling for Release 0.10.0

[wine.dev]

> [Tinycc-devel] Re :  Calling for Release 0.10.0 – Hi,
>
> the mob branch is pretty much unstable.
>
> Before turning the mob branch into a new release, better do some thorough
> checking and regression testing.
>
> And have something consistent across the various supported platforms (x86,
> AMD64, ARM, M1, RISC-V, ...).
>
> Regards. [...]

Where do you see tcc to be unstable?

Yes, the last patch is ugly and should be removed or fixed
(path is created with alloca and later overwritten with malloc),
and that patch is only used as fallback,
when CONFIG_TCCDIR is undefined.

Primary goals for tcc are:
* Compile to correct code,
* as fast as possible,
* while being as simple as possible


For memory leaks from malloc, which are only freed at program shutdown:
A design decision is not a bug.
* tcc is a short running program,
   and a design decission to not free every memory from malloc
   is also done by other compiler for speed reasons:
   (look at DMC or DMD as examples.)
   (i dont know, if both compiler do not free, but i can remember,
    that walter bright wrote, not to free memory was his
    design decision for speed reasons).
* things done in libtcc are different,
   as the programm, which is using libtcc might live longer.
   I would suggest to fix memory leaks in libtcc.


For using an object format, with is not the same, what most other compiler
use on that system:
A design decision, and not a bug
Disadvantage:
* You can't link object files from other compiler
Advantage:
* simplify the code generator, the linker and probably other tools

This is also done by other compiler for many Years:
* Watcom/OpenWatcom uses OMF
* Embarcadero C++ Builder:
   The newer compiler are based on clang
   and use ELF object files also on Windows

-​-
Regards ... Detlef