From 94f7c1d47a98d5cb827e0c9f2d5b04fc9ee9e476 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Leo Tenenbaum
toc
improves on C's syntax (and semantics) in many ways,
+
toc
improves on C’s syntax (and semantics) in many ways,
To declare x
as an integer and set it to 5,
you can do:
-x := 5; // Declare x and set x to 5 (infer type)
-x : int = 5; // Explicitly make the type int.
-x : int; x = 5; // Declare x as an integer, then set it to 5.
+x := 5; // Declare x and set x to 5 (infer type)
+x : int = 5; // Explicitly make the type int.
+x : int; x = 5; // Declare x as an integer, then set it to 5.
toc
is statically typed and has many of C's features, but
+
toc
is statically typed and has many of C’s features, but
it is nearly as fast in theory.
See docs
for more information (in progress).
tests
has some test programs written in toc
.
To compile the compiler on a Unix-y system, just run build.sh
. You can supply a compiler by running CC=tcc build.sh
, or built it in release mode with ./build.sh release
(which will help speed up compiling large programs).
To compile the compiler on a Unix-y system, just run ./build.sh release
. You can supply a compiler by running CC=tcc ./build.sh release
, or build it in debug mode without the release
.
On other systems, you can just compile main.c with a C compiler. toc
uses several C99 and a couple of C11 features, so it might not work on all compilers. But it does compile on quite a few, including clang
, gcc
, and tcc
. It can also be compiled as if it were C++, but it does break the standard in a few places*. So, MSVC can also compile it. The outputted code should be C99-compliant.
toc
compiles to C for three reasons:
On other systems, you can just compile main.c with a C compiler. toc uses several C99 and a couple of C11 features, so it might not work on all compilers. But it does compile on quite a few, including clang
, gcc
, and tcc
. It can also be compiled as if it were C++, but it does break the standard in a few places*. So, MSVC can also compile it. The outputted code should be C99-compliant.
toc
is set up as a unity build, meaning that there is only one translation unit. So, main.c
#include
s toc.c
, which #include
s all of toc
's files. This improves (from scratch) compilation speeds, since you don't have to include headers a bunch of times for each translation unit. This is more of a problem in C++, where, for example, doing #include <map>
ends up turning into 25,000 lines after preprocessing. All of toc's source code, which includes most of the C standard library, at the time of this writing (Dec 2019) is only 22,000 lines after preprocessing; imagine including all of that once for each translation unit which includes map
. It also obviates the need for fancy build systems like CMake.
toc
is set up as a unity build, meaning that there is only one translation unit. So, main.c
#include
s toc.c
, which #include
s all of toc
’s files.
This improves compilation speeds (especially from scratch), since you don’t have to include headers a bunch of times for each translation unit. This is more of a problem in C++, where, for example, doing #include <map>
ends up turning into 25,000 lines after preprocessing. All of toc’s source code, which includes most of the C standard library, at the time of this writing (Dec 2019) is only 22,000 lines after preprocessing; imagine including all of that once for each translation unit which includes map
. It also obviates the need for fancy build systems like CMake.
Here are all the C99 features which toc
depends on (I might have forgotten some...):
Here are all the C99 features which toc
depends on (I might have forgotten some…):
stdint.h
inttypes.h
int x[2] = {y, z};
)__VA_ARGS__
The last three of those could all be removed fairly easily.
+ +The last three of those could all be removed fairly easily (assuming the system actually has 8-, 16-, 32-, and 64-bit signed and unsigned types).
And here are all of its C11 features:
max_align_t
and alignof
- It can still compile without these but it won't technically be standard-compliantmax_align_t
and alignof
- It can still compile without these but it won’t technically be standard-compliantSee main.c
for a bit more information.
Here are the major versions of toc
.
Version | +Description | +Date | +
---|---|---|
0.0 | +Initial version. | +2019 Dec 6 | +
0.1 | +Constant parameter inference. | +2019 Dec 15 | +
If you find a bug, you can report it through GitHub’s issue tracker, or by emailing pommicket@gmail.com.
+ +Just send me the toc
source code which results in the bug, and I’ll try to fix it.
* for those curious, it has to do with goto
. In C, this program:
@@ -80,7 +133,8 @@ int main() {
}
-Is completely fine. x
will hold an unspecified value after the jump (but it isn't used so it doesn't really matter). Apparently, in C++, this is an ill-formed program. This is a bit ridiculous since
Is completely fine. x
will hold an unspecified value after the jump (but it isn’t used so it doesn’t really matter). Apparently, in C++, this is an ill-formed program. This is a bit ridiculous since
int main() {
@@ -91,4 +145,5 @@ int main() {
}
-is fine. So that's an interesting little "fun fact": int x = 5;
isn't always the same as int x; x = 5;
in C++.
is fine. So that’s an interesting little “fun fact”: int x = 5;
isn’t always the same as int x; x = 5;
in C++.