4 ms·
There's a lot of idiosyncratic verbiage about stuff like collapse of civilization and users vs. operators, but it's not clear to me what makes this more lightwe
by ummonk 1y ago
There's a lot of idiosyncratic verbiage about stuff like collapse of civilization and users vs. operators, but it's not clear to me what makes this more lightweight or hackable than a typical lightweight RTOS or even just baremetal drivers running on a microcontroller.
- nonethewiser 1y agoOr why an "almost C compiler" is better than a C compiler.
- GTP 1y agoI think that having an "almost" C compiler is a trick they use to minimize the size of the codebase.
- vdupras 1y agoYes, this is it. A C compiler in 50 kilobytes of code is pretty innovative. It's also doesn't lie about the "almost". It's really almost C. It's just that C's stdlib is POSIX centric and doesn't fit Forth well, so it's not implemented as is.
- yencabulator 1y agoTCC is 100 kB, already exists, and is a real C compiler (+preprocessor+assembler+linker). It can build Linux too! https://bellard.org/tcc/ https://bellard.org/tcc/
- vdupras 1y ago100kb binary. I'm talking about source code size. TinyCC's source is 1400kb in size.
- kaoD 1y agoOr rather, why is it not much worse than an actual C compiler. In an apocalyptic event energy would be precious. You'd rather have an optimizing compiler to run longer off your solar-charged car battery or whatever. I like the roleplay/lore and the tech effort is impressive but I don't think it fits the idea.
- fuhsnn 1y ago> I like the roleplay/lore and the tech effort is impressive but I don't think it fits the idea. "An optimizing compiler requires at least 500MB of RAM, which can only be looted from level 7 Terminator elites!"