Re: question about linker

On 26/11/2024 18:35, Thiago Adams wrote:

 (I think I know the answer but I would like to learn more.)
 I am using C89 as "compiler backend intermediate language".
 I want a very simple output that could facilitate the construction of a simple C89 compiler focused on code generation.
 I am removing these features from the generated code.
   - typedef
  - enum
  - preprocessor
  - const

I don't use them in generated code either. (Only in a brief section at the top to define my prefered type designations.)

 At this output, I am generating the prototypes for the functions I call.
 For instance,
int strcmp( const char* lhs, const char* rhs );
 is generated as
 int strcmp( char* lhs, char* rhs );

I don't use #include either, not even for standard headers, although gcc doesn't like it when I define my own std library functions. There are ways to shut it up though.

I am also generating the structs as required (on demand). For the structs I am renaming it because I am generating all structs at global scope.
 Question:
Does the compiler/linkers? Cares If I am lying about const? Or If rename the structs?
 I think it does not care, and it seems to work (it compiles and run).

I don't know why the linker would care about anything. All it sees are symbol imports and exports.
A compiler might care about lack of 'const' in that it could stop it doing doing some optimisations.
But it can't report a type mismatch between 'const' and non-'const' types if 'const' has been banished completely.