Re: suggestion for GCC (1)

[Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>]

ali hagigat <hagigatali@gmail.com> writes:

> Are memcmp, memset, and memmove built in?
> So a built in function may be in the library or the code I write. right?

Yes.

> I have used cross compilers for micro controllers for years. They
> translate C/Assembly code you write and produce a final object file.
> they are not dependent on operating system, system calls or force our
> code to be linked with some unknown strange libraries which programmer
> does not know about them at all.
>
> How they work? Professionals like you can implement the same
> functionality for gcc without the weak point of adding mem functions.
>
> It is an idea but I am surprised how you say that it is impossible to
> do such a thing.

I don't think that I said that it is impossible to do such a thing.  If
I did, I misspoke, and I apologize for that if in fact I did do it.

I think that, rather than saying that doing something else is
impossible, I explained why gcc acts the way it does.

> Besides gcc is dependent to what? operating system or the architecture
> of hardware like Intel chipsets, host bridge and I/O bridge in
> addition to CPU?

As you know, gcc is generally independent of the host bridge and I/O
bridge.  It is of course dependent on the CPU itself.  It is dependent
on the target operating system in a few ways.

Ian