[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Tinycc-devel] Fix signedness of LL shift operators in libtcc1.c (gr

From: David A. Wheeler
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] Fix signedness of LL shift operators in libtcc1.c (grischka-2005-09-25 case_10)
Date: Thu, 03 May 2007 18:49:55 -0400 (EDT)

Rob Landley:
> Ah.  Back to Ken Thompson's original "trusting trust" paper, "where's the 
> source for this"...

Yep; that's a topic I'm familiar with :-).  It's not even so much about trust, 
as about bootstrapping in general.  I know you've got a lot of experience in 
bootstrapping too.

> Hmmm...  Ideally we'd want it to automatically use this code when tcc was 
> compiling itself.

Actually, I don't think that's true; it depends on the user.  If the user wants 
the compilation to run as fast as possible, or wants the code to be as small as 
possible, tcc self-compilation is NOT what you want to do.  And I think many 
people use tcc BECAUSE of its fast compilation and small size.

If you DO want tcc to be completely self-hosted, and thus don't care about the 
performance hit, THEN you want this code.

>  Is that when __TINYC__ is defined?  In which case, an
> easier (or at least more logical) reproduction sequence would be:
> ./configure
> make
> make install

Disagree.  I don't want a test routine to FORCE installation somewhere; I want 
to run tests BEFORE I install it :-).  That would also make testing easy to get 
wrong; I have dozens of tcc's running around, and while I'm testing tcc I make 
sure that NO tcc is installed.  That way I can be confident that what I _think_ 
I'm testing is what I'm actually testing.  That's why I invoked tcc directly, 
using "./tcc", in my comment - because that I way I don't mess up the installed 
tcc while I'm testing tcc.

--- David A. Wheeler

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]