3 ms·
Lacking support for structs, I think this is too minimalistic to be called "a C compiler".
by gonzus 8mo ago
Lacking support for structs, I think this is too minimalistic to be called "a C compiler".
- pilord314 8mo agoyou bootstrap it into a library you can include optionally, duh
- userbinator 8mo ago[flagged]
- perching_aix 8mo ago> but it seems there are others here who don't want to speak of the truth Or you know, just didn't get hung up on the blatantly obvious thing not being explicitly disclaimed right in the title, only in the preamble?
- userbinator 8mo agoNot telling the whole truth, little-by-little, this is how honesty crumbles.
- benj111 8mo agoWeren't structs a fairly late addition to C? And anyway, isn't that kind of missing the point. 512 bytes isn't much. Your comment is nearly a 5th of that budget.