Re: another C-like language? was Compilers :)

On Tuesday, 3 January 2023 at 17:45:17 UTC, Steve Limb wrote:
> I’m not sure there would be that much demand for a cut down C.


I recently read (well, skimmed)
http://www.mjbauer.biz/C-less%20Reference%20Manual.pdf
"A concise subset of the C programming language".
Though I'm a bit baffled by some of Bauer's choices. Why is
`char *foo="foo", *bar="bar"; puts(foo); puts(bar);`
allowed but not
`char *foo="foo"; puts(foo); char *bar="bar"; puts(bar);`
? Admittedly, the latter is only allowed in relatively recent C, but from my
(very limited) experience writing compilers, the latter is no harder to
compile.
I idly thought about adding stuff to C-less and calling it C-more-or-less,
Cmol, for short.


I'm up for reading the source of any relatively simple compiler for, and
written in, anything C-like. I've tried making sense of the GNU C compiler a
few times. My brain may recover one day!
[If you're doing a one-pass compiler, it's easier if all the declarations are at the
beginning so you can generate the code to set up the stack frame and do initializations.
I agree that on modern computers it's not a big deal, but remember that early C compilers
ran in 24K bytes and I don't mean meagabytes. -John]

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.