|
|
"Herbert Rosenau" <os2guy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:33:20 UTC, jacob navia <jacob@xxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> to himself
>
>> You are just spreading MISINFORMATION.
>
> The only job of a C compiler is to compile the language C into
> something an implementation can use to get a final builded
> executeabble onto the CPU.
>
> The standard says nothing about linker, does not even mention how to
> get a program in a state that it can be accessed by one or more
> CPU(s). The standard does not even requires that there must be a
Yes, but in the real world linkage plays a part in understanding how C
programs are assembled.
> Compiler. C can be interpreted in runtime using an C interpreter. It
> is possible to use a comiler that does nothing than compile C to a
> bytecode to optimise the runtime the interpreter needs to interpret
> that. So no linker is needed. No stavk is needed, no BSS is needed,
> not even something that you names segments are needed.
>
> C is a programming language that is defined by syntax, semantik and
> behavior of an abstract mashine, whereas the behavior of the abstract
> mashine itself is defined exactly, leaving open anything only a real
> implementation can know.
No one really cares about the olden days - they are looking for help now
in the modern days using real compilers and built in linkers. They are
interested in how linkage between different languages might affect their
program. How debug information is stored etc.
Sorry, but thats the way it is. Try to be more helpful instead of
resentful. You will feel much happier.
|
|