Re: [9fans] Re: Ruby port

[Pietro Gagliardi <pietro10@mac.com>]

for (x in gcc/src/*.[chyl7s]) { # All this nonsense is simply to  
avoid useful and/or standard things like __FILE__ or __STDC__ */
	sed 's/__asm__//g
		s/__extension__//g
		s/__inline__//g
		s/__typeof__//g
		s/__restrict__//g
		s/__builtin_[a-zA-Z0-9_][a-zA-Z0-9_]*//g
		s/__cxa_atexit//g
		s/__cxa_get_exception_ptr//g
		s/__attribute__//g
		s/__null//g
		s/__strong//g
		s/__weak//g
		s/__int64//g' $x > $x^.new # keep going
	# note that we need a little extra work for __attribute__
	mv $x^.new $x
}

On Nov 12, 2007, at 7:59 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:

>
> On 2007-Nov-12, at 11:39 , Steve Simon wrote:
>
>> Is the "problem" more the lack of g++ and perhaps
>> glibc than the gcc C compiler itself or am I
>> missing somthing.
>
> I find that > 90% of the problem is code that makes use of all the  
> __(foo)__ attribute crud in function declarations.  It shouldn't be  
> difficult to write a tool to strip that nonsense out.
>
> Alternatively you could teach the compilers to recognize and ignore  
> those constructs, but my personal preference is to just elide the  
> bits from the source at import. Even ignoring them lends them more  
> credibility than my morals allow ;-P
>
> -lyndon