Re: Writing own source disk

On 05/06/2024 09:13, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-06-04 19:57:31 +0000, bart said:
 

On 04/06/2024 14:40, Ben Bacarisse wrote:

Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> writes:
>

On 03/06/2024 13:11, Ben Bacarisse wrote:

>

But from a practical point of view, yes my quine is  massively
powerful. Most graphical programs do have images as source. And they just
get zipped up into the FileSystem XML file. So any binary data can be
included. Easily, Using exactly the same system.

>
I'm not getting it.  Why do I want a quine in connection to a graphical
program?  I want a way to include everything in the distribution, but
we've had that for ages.  Why is having a program that outputs something
you already have (by defintion!) of any use?
>

>
>
My C compiler embeds the the standard headers it uses within the executable. That makes for a tidy, run-anywhere application as it is a single file.

 There are not run-anywhere applications. Each computer only runs
applications that are written in a language that it understands.
Many computers only understand one language and no language is
understood by every computer.
 

I mean run anywhere within a computer's file system: any folder, any drive, any memory stick.
For a run-anywhere cross-platform version of my C compiler, I can supply a single .c file instead of .exe file.
Then it'll need a local build process in order to produce a suitable binary. (But since it still targets Win64 ABI, that is not so useful for that application.)
Alternately I can supply a IL (intermediate language) version, which can be cross-platform with an interpreter. Then you will need a suitable interpreter, so it's back to square one, however the interpreter is a 1/4 the size of the compiler, and it will also run multiple different applications once ported.