[uClibc]Re: Tiny C Compiler!

[Miles Bader]

hooh pxw <electrorb at yahoo.com> writes:
> Do make Native uClibc/Tcc-0.9.10 toolchain.
> 
> why?
> Actually, Same reason why uclibc made instead of using glibc.
> small size(the golden rule), fast compile speed, etc, ...
> anyway, because it is small.  

Do you mean to compile user-applications, or to compile uClibc?

uClibc is often in situations where the size on the _target_ is
important, but where all development is done elsewhere (e.g. using a
cross-compilation environment, or simply on a larger machine).

This means that there's typically not that much advantage to having a
small compiler, even for user applications -- and note that even if the
_compiler_ is small, uClibc and its header files &c may not be...  [a
quick check shows that libc.a is about 11MB, and the header files take
up about 1.3MB]

As for compiling uClibc itself, I suspect that getting everything to
work with a different compiler may be tough -- not only because of the
inevitable bugs and differing interpretations of the standard, but
because at least the system-dependent portions of uClibc explicitly use
gcc extensions (mostly extended asm, but probably guess others as well).

Also, since tcc appears to be x86 only, any effort to port stuff is of
somewhat limited utility for many users of uClibc.

-Miles
-- 
Next to fried food, the South has suffered most from oratory.
  			-- Walter Hines Page