On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 3:11 AM, Steve D'Aprano <steve+pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote: > On Thu, 18 May 2017 11:38 pm, bartc wrote: >> OK, same url but with '32' instead: >> >> https://github.com/bartg/langs/blob/master/qlang/qcc32.c >> https://github.com/bartg/langs/blob/master/qlang/pcc32.c > > https://duckduckgo.com/html/?q=how%20to%20download%20code%20from%20github > > Dear gods, I'm reduced to getting technical advice from a WordPress site...
Ouch. > Okay, apparently I have to find the top level of the repository, and > append ".git" to the URL... > > ...there's no qlang repository... ah this looks like it: > > https://github.com/bartg/langs.git To be fair, "appending .git to the URL" isn't necessary. If you're at the repository's base URL, you can clone that as is. But since bart has no real experience with git, I rather doubt that he expected you to clone this using git. He expected you to obtain the source code, uhh... somehow. Actually his use of git would be considered abominable, except that he basically isn't using git at all. I tried to search for the over-large number that triggered your warning, and didn't find it in the "real" source files, but found that the (checked-in) intermediate files are utterly useless for humans. Consider this commit: https://github.com/bartg/langs/commit/12cf5b7311e98fde3503cfd1d709603dc6cc2e17 (Sorry Steve, but I don't have any better way to share the commit than a GitHub link. You can use "git show 12cf5b" if you already have the repo cloned though.) > Finally: > > git clone https://github.com/bartg/langs.git > > > That works! Now, using my awesome deductive powers from 20+ years of using > Linux, I realise that I must cd into the the "langs" directory. Good thing > I'm not a beginner, hey? That cd is specific to your git-based code acquisition. Since bart brags that you can compile this as a single file, he probably expected you to download just that one file into /usr/bin and compile it right there. > Where's your build documentation? I tried reading the README file, but it > was useless. qlang/readme.md was just as useless. > > qlang/Instructions.md has some vague instructions for building the 64-bit > version. Using my awesome powers of deduction, I reckon that changing 64 to > 32 should work... > > > Quote: > ### Download Q compiler as qcc64.c, Q interpreter as pcc.64 > > Well, I cloned the entire repo. Does that count as downloading? Do I need to > rename the files? Who the hell knows? -- see above. To be fair, most of what you're seeing here is very common with small projects that haven't been widely deployed. Smooth installation instructions take time, effort, and many MANY different people's deployment. Your criticisms would be considered rather inappropriate and out of place - except that he's been moaning about CPython's installation instructions. > [steve@ando langs]$ gcc -m32 -O3 qlang/qcc32.c -oqcc -lm > qlang/qcc32.c:13808:23: warning: integer constant is so large that it is > unsigned > qlang/qcc32.c: In function ‘do_tag’: > qlang/qcc32.c:13808: warning: this decimal constant is unsigned only in ISO > C90 > > > Hmmm, that's a bit scary... I mean, Python is used by millions of people. I > can afford to trust it even if it generates warnings, because if they were > serious, somebody would have noticed by now. But a single-user project from > somebody I don't know? I'm less inclined to trust code I don't know that > generates warnings I don't understand. Unfortunately, this is true of a *lot* of code out there. GCC's warnings are incredibly extensive, and a lot of them are about specific revisions of the ISO standard (so they'll disappear if you add "--std=c99" or something). If bart didn't himself use GCC, the chances that his code will compile warning-free are almost zilch. Doesn't necessarily mean the code's wrong. In this particular instance, gcc is cautioning you that -2**63 is the same as 2**63 when your 'long long' type is a 64-bit one. I'm not sure what that number is used for, though, as it doesn't show up in the "actual sources". > That at least completed without any warnings. Hmmm... that reminds me... > > > [steve@ando langs]$ gcc -Wall -m32 -O3 qlang/pcc32.c -opcc -lm > > [wall of text] > > Holy mother of perl! Look at all those warnings! Uninitialised variables, > unsafe dereferencing of type-punned pointers, missing parentheses, unused > variables and labels, confusion between int and longint... Now this, however, is more serious. Those warnings scare me, too. (I just tried it.) Instead of being "gcc is noisy", these are "your code is sloppy". These are exactly why I tell most people NOT to write in C. For machine-generated code, this is IMO unacceptable. Maybe "-Wno-unused" is okay (machine-generated code often has some junk in it), but all the uninitialized variables? No way. Doesn't matter what compiler you use, run it in all-warnings-enabled mode at least once as part of testing your codegen. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
