3 ms·
From your endorsement of "using the compiler's symbol tables" (paraphrasing) I took you to mean that you're proposing binding directly to GCC (or another tool)
by dikaiosune 9y ago
From your endorsement of "using the compiler's symbol tables" (paraphrasing) I took you to mean that you're proposing binding directly to GCC (or another tool) as a library, relying on it's internal data structures as this C API. Based on this comment, it sounds like you're now suggesting that this API should still be standardized and require translating from the compiler's internals into some standardized AST/symbol format anyways. I still think the latter is bonkers for several reasons (SIGABRT being one), but it's significantly less bonkers than what I had thought you were proposing initially.
- teacup50 9y ago> I still think the latter is bonkers for several reasons (SIGABRT being one)... The fact that we're typing this, and it works -- without the entire world falling apart because of crashes in complex library code -- demonstrates why this is not remotely bonkers.