Re: question about linker

On 07/12/2024 16:06, David Brown wrote:

On 06/12/2024 20:20, Bart wrote:

If your task to get from A to B was split into two, you'd be happy to do the first part by a fast car, then complete the rest of it on a horse and cart, for no reason at all?
>

 The comparison was between C to object code (with a real compiler) and from X to C and then to the object code (using a real compiler).  If your beliefs were true that gcc (and other proper C compilers) are incredibly slow, why would it make any difference if someone is starting from X or starting from C?  In both cases, compilation would take a long time - C compilation speed is neither more nor less important whether you are programming in X or C.

You don't appear to get it. If you are writing C by hand, then people like you would want to use a more powerful, and therefore slower, compiler, that will analyse that C. It can also take care of the many shortcomings in the language.
But if the C has been machine-generated, that analysis is no longer relevant. Then you may just want the fastest and simplest conversion.
This was the basis of my use-case for a fast and possibly compact compiler.

And you are the only one so far who finds gcc to be inconveniently slow.

"Mainstream compilers like Clang and GCC are very slow"
From:
https://sbaziotis.com/compilers/common-misconceptions-about-compilers.html