Re: [Tack-devel] K&R vs ANSI C

[Daters R Us A. A. <ad...@da...>]

On 25 Jul 2005, at 09:58, David Given wrote:

> On Monday 25 July 2005 09:38, Simon Waite wrote:
>> I think half the point of ACK is that it can be compiled by itself.
>
> Well, the ACK does come with an ANSI C compiler, and I've had it 
> compiling on
> Minix, which uses a (ANSI-only) subset of the ACK as it's native cc.
>
> Currently the ACK won't generate runnable code for any platform that 
> can run
> the ACK, with the possible exception of SPARC Solaris (I need to try 
> that),
> so I haven't been able to try compiling the ACK with the *actual* ACK.
>
>> My last problems with OSX compiling seems to stem from it not being
>> able to link properly which is beyond my abilities to debug as I'm not
>> that up to speed with developing on OSX (though I guess if I used a 
>> gnu
>> binutils toolchain rather than using OSXs native mach-o linker I'd 
>> have
>> better luck)
>
> I've had a brief play on SourceForge's OSX compiler box. I have *no 
> idea*
> what's going on --- it's complaining about missing symbols which are 
> quite
> clearly in the libraries. Changing the library order doesn't help

Yup, the only thing I didn't try is manually link to the object files.


> Does OSX require symbols to be explicitly exported in the source 
> files, do you
> know?

Nope, and the symbols are right there in the libraries! it's probably a 
bug in the linker :(

> -- 
> +- David Given --McQ-+ "I don't like the thought of her hearing what 
> I'm
> |  dg...@co...    | thinking." "*No-one* likes the thought of 
> hearing
> | (dg...@ta...) | what you're thinking." --- Firefly, _Objects in
> +- www.cowlark.com --+ Space_