I think it is fantastic to have more compiler implementations. It was probably also a fun project to code. What I find lacking in web pages is a motivation. What makes it different from popular compilers? Where is this project heading? What would be potential benefits/use-cases for using this compiler vs others, lessons learned, etc.?
LeFantome 1 hours ago [-]
> What I find lacking in web pages is a motivation
From those pages:
"The purpose of Kefir project is producing an independent C17/C23 compiler with
well-rounded architecture and well-defined scope that is feasible for implementation by a single developer."
He wants a third compiler to vet code portability. He wants it simple enough to build and maintain himself.
fuhsnn 5 hours ago [-]
I have found portability bugs in many projects with slimcc just because it exposed different preprocessor defines, some gate critical __attribute__ behind __GNUC__ check, some have buggy fallback to __builtin functions or VLA that nobody noticed in years, these could have been avoided with just an automatic build job in the CI with kefir or slimcc, (tcc is awesome but less suited for being a drop-in).
It is also important to have more independent implementations of the C standard, not only to sort out dark corners in the specification (current WG14 have been doing great), but to prevent it turning into GCC-Clang power struggle.
aktau 5 minutes ago [-]
I remember when we still had tcc in Neovim CI. I think it got removed eventually for being too much of a burden to maintain.
How are slimcc/kefir different/easier to drop in?
adamrt 13 hours ago [-]
I agree on it being fantastic.
For your other questions I found these in the linked text
Those sections don't really provide details on the author's motivations to be honest
applfanboysbgon 10 hours ago [-]
I think they provide enough information to take a reasonable guess. It seems likely to me that the author is the type of programmer who prefers to understand what their code is doing, with as little magic involved as possible. Using other people's compilers is very magical, all kinds of transformations are being applied to the code you wrote and you are relying entirely on abstractions without really knowing how your code translates to controlling the hardware. Some people prefer to know exactly that.
nine_k 11 hours ago [-]
It's amazing how much one motivated person can achieve. Also, how competent the result seems to be. The test suite alone is pretty impressive.
edwcross 2 hours ago [-]
c-testsuite is not made by the author of Kefir.
fuhsnn 1 hours ago [-]
c-testsuite itself was curated from simple-cc and tinycc's test files, the latter originated from picoc.
anta40 3 hours ago [-]
Very impressive for a single dev project.
Nice to see someone started the work from zero instead of piggybacking LLVM.
fuhsnn 6 hours ago [-]
Congrats for the new optimizing pipeline, and thanks for the acknowledgment! It's nice to have company in the non-__GNUC__ camp.
Panzerschrek 2 hours ago [-]
Can it compile Doom?
Rendered at 07:30:43 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
From those pages:
"The purpose of Kefir project is producing an independent C17/C23 compiler with well-rounded architecture and well-defined scope that is feasible for implementation by a single developer."
He wants a third compiler to vet code portability. He wants it simple enough to build and maintain himself.
It is also important to have more independent implementations of the C standard, not only to sort out dark corners in the specification (current WG14 have been doing great), but to prevent it turning into GCC-Clang power struggle.
How are slimcc/kefir different/easier to drop in?
For your other questions I found these in the linked text
Nice to see someone started the work from zero instead of piggybacking LLVM.