3 ms·
> Is this related to the a.out file that gcc outputs if you don't specify a filename with -o? It is not directly related to the filename used by gcc. It is re
by pwg 8y ago
> Is this related to the a.out file that gcc outputs if you don't specify a filename with -o?
It is not directly related to the filename used by gcc. It is related to the a.out binary executable file format (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A.out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A.out). It is confusing due to the file format, and the choice of default name by gcc, having the same name.
> Also, I thought bitrot was bits in files changing over time due to the storage medium failing;
That is the usual meaning for "bitrot".
> is this a different use of the term?
To some extent yes. In this context the use of "bitrot" is related to parts of the source code drifting apart from changes made in other areas of the source. So in a very broad sense, a similar meaning, but also a very contextual based meaning.
- schoen 8y agoSee http://www.jargon.net/jargonfile/s/softwarerot.html http://www.jargon.net/jargonfile/s/softwarerot.html ("maybe be semi-humorously ascribed to bit rot")
- SilasX 8y agoAm I reading that Wikipedia link right, that the default name of compiled executables is a.out because they originally were emitted in that format?
- Sniffnoy 8y agoNo, you've got it backwards. The format is called that because it was the format of the a.out file.
- SilasX 8y agoSo they named the standard compiler output "a.out", for independent reasons, and when it came time to distinguish formats, they called the original standard format "a.out" just because that's what the file name always was?
- Sniffnoy 8y agoExactly. I mean, I don't know the exact history of when the name "a.out" got transferred to the format, but I have to assume that it wasn't until there was something to contrast it with.