Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. "multiple compilers for a single language is bad because they aren't fully compatible" yea and making the code works on multiple of them, the ones that might be used, is your job as a developer

"multiple compilers for a single language is bad because they aren't fully compatible" yea and making the code works on multiple of them, the ones that might be used, is your job as a developer

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
20 Posts 6 Posters 16 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • srazkvt@tech.lgbtS srazkvt@tech.lgbt

    anyone scream at web devs if they go "sorry we don't care about firefox, only chromium, they don't have perfect compatibility" but when it comes to literally any other codebase suddenly it's not expected anymore

    like, webdevs write some utterly fucked up architecture, sure, and i'm not defending them for everything, but double standard much ?

    meluzzy@woof.techM This user is from outside of this forum
    meluzzy@woof.techM This user is from outside of this forum
    meluzzy@woof.tech
    wrote last edited by
    #11

    @SRAZKVT "But you see there is this really fancy CSS thing they added that only works on chrome now and Firefox won't add it until they make a version that actually follows the specification unlike chromium. Sure we used to make websites compatible with IE6 , Chrome, Firefox, Safari and even old Opera but now we have gotten used to how comfy new coding features are that we are never going back to thinking in more than 1 browser, also we only support versions of that browser that are less than 1 year old because if you haven't updated you are just a security issue and thats the perfect excuse because we can make it look like we care about security and that's why we only allow access if you use the latest version of the browser. Isn't that neat?.
    Here have a website full of brand new webgpu wasm code that definitely will not cause any security issues in the near future. Dont try to run it on Firefox because it doesn't support --pseudo-webkit content: content-fit( --deluxe ? auto : full-auto);"

    srazkvt@tech.lgbtS 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • meluzzy@woof.techM meluzzy@woof.tech

      @SRAZKVT "But you see there is this really fancy CSS thing they added that only works on chrome now and Firefox won't add it until they make a version that actually follows the specification unlike chromium. Sure we used to make websites compatible with IE6 , Chrome, Firefox, Safari and even old Opera but now we have gotten used to how comfy new coding features are that we are never going back to thinking in more than 1 browser, also we only support versions of that browser that are less than 1 year old because if you haven't updated you are just a security issue and thats the perfect excuse because we can make it look like we care about security and that's why we only allow access if you use the latest version of the browser. Isn't that neat?.
      Here have a website full of brand new webgpu wasm code that definitely will not cause any security issues in the near future. Dont try to run it on Firefox because it doesn't support --pseudo-webkit content: content-fit( --deluxe ? auto : full-auto);"

      srazkvt@tech.lgbtS This user is from outside of this forum
      srazkvt@tech.lgbtS This user is from outside of this forum
      srazkvt@tech.lgbt
      wrote last edited by
      #12

      @meluzzy yeah, webdevs writing non compatible websites that won't run anywhere other than chromium are shitty and not doing their job properly

      but they are being told to fix it by people who wouldn't have done it either, just because they're in another branch, and that isn't fair, they should hold themselves to the same expectations as they have for others

      meluzzy@woof.techM 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • srazkvt@tech.lgbtS srazkvt@tech.lgbt

        @meluzzy yeah, webdevs writing non compatible websites that won't run anywhere other than chromium are shitty and not doing their job properly

        but they are being told to fix it by people who wouldn't have done it either, just because they're in another branch, and that isn't fair, they should hold themselves to the same expectations as they have for others

        meluzzy@woof.techM This user is from outside of this forum
        meluzzy@woof.techM This user is from outside of this forum
        meluzzy@woof.tech
        wrote last edited by
        #13

        @SRAZKVT Webdevs making the most convoluted frameworks possible that end up being used to make websites that work just like scrolling down a PDF with fancy animations inside.
        If reinventing the wheel was a competition they would have won every single year. Not even Rust devs can compete against that.

        And the whole "oh well my code doesn't work because you changed something so now you should fix it. However if it was me I would just ask you to fix it yourself instead because colaborating to achieve a compatible system is not a real thing in webdev"

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • q66@gts.q66.moeQ q66@gts.q66.moe

          @SRAZKVT @hypha you can probably make even those work with gcc/clang using -O0 and/or other shenanigans anyway ig

          kirtai@tech.lgbtK This user is from outside of this forum
          kirtai@tech.lgbtK This user is from outside of this forum
          kirtai@tech.lgbt
          wrote last edited by
          #14

          @q66 @SRAZKVT @hypha
          This reminds me that gcc/clang will force enable --fast-math without warning f you enable -O3 which has issues for floating point maths.

          q66@gts.q66.moeQ 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • kirtai@tech.lgbtK kirtai@tech.lgbt

            @q66 @SRAZKVT @hypha
            This reminds me that gcc/clang will force enable --fast-math without warning f you enable -O3 which has issues for floating point maths.

            q66@gts.q66.moeQ This user is from outside of this forum
            q66@gts.q66.moeQ This user is from outside of this forum
            q66@gts.q66.moe
            wrote last edited by
            #15

            @kirtai @SRAZKVT @hypha uh, no it won't? -ffast-math is never enabled unless explicitly, since it's not ieee754 compliant

            under clang -O3 is identical to -O2 plus some optimizations with high compile time costs and low runtime benefits, under gcc -O3 is closer to clang -O2 but definitely no ffast-math either

            q66@gts.q66.moeQ 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • q66@gts.q66.moeQ q66@gts.q66.moe

              @kirtai @SRAZKVT @hypha uh, no it won't? -ffast-math is never enabled unless explicitly, since it's not ieee754 compliant

              under clang -O3 is identical to -O2 plus some optimizations with high compile time costs and low runtime benefits, under gcc -O3 is closer to clang -O2 but definitely no ffast-math either

              q66@gts.q66.moeQ This user is from outside of this forum
              q66@gts.q66.moeQ This user is from outside of this forum
              q66@gts.q66.moe
              wrote last edited by
              #16

              @kirtai @SRAZKVT @hypha there is -Ofast which is basically -O3 plus non-compliant fp

              kirtai@tech.lgbtK 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • q66@gts.q66.moeQ q66@gts.q66.moe

                @kirtai @SRAZKVT @hypha there is -Ofast which is basically -O3 plus non-compliant fp

                kirtai@tech.lgbtK This user is from outside of this forum
                kirtai@tech.lgbtK This user is from outside of this forum
                kirtai@tech.lgbt
                wrote last edited by
                #17

                @q66 @SRAZKVT @hypha
                I had an article about this but now I can't find it.
                Dammit.

                q66@gts.q66.moeQ 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • kirtai@tech.lgbtK kirtai@tech.lgbt

                  @q66 @SRAZKVT @hypha
                  I had an article about this but now I can't find it.
                  Dammit.

                  q66@gts.q66.moeQ This user is from outside of this forum
                  q66@gts.q66.moeQ This user is from outside of this forum
                  q66@gts.q66.moe
                  wrote last edited by
                  #18

                  @kirtai @SRAZKVT @hypha well if you read an article about it that was definitely misinfo

                  neither of the major compilers enable it for any normal opt levels

                  kirtai@tech.lgbtK 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • q66@gts.q66.moeQ q66@gts.q66.moe

                    @kirtai @SRAZKVT @hypha well if you read an article about it that was definitely misinfo

                    neither of the major compilers enable it for any normal opt levels

                    kirtai@tech.lgbtK This user is from outside of this forum
                    kirtai@tech.lgbtK This user is from outside of this forum
                    kirtai@tech.lgbt
                    wrote last edited by
                    #19

                    @q66 @SRAZKVT @hypha
                    I stand corrected then

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • hypha@cafe.mycelium.locahlo.stH hypha@cafe.mycelium.locahlo.st

                      @SRAZKVT @q66 i wonder if there is code only working on tcc and failing with gcc

                      noisytoot@berkeley.edu.plN This user is from outside of this forum
                      noisytoot@berkeley.edu.plN This user is from outside of this forum
                      noisytoot@berkeley.edu.pl
                      wrote last edited by
                      #20
                      @hypha @SRAZKVT @q66 anything with a shebang line, which tcc ignores (to allow for scripting using tcc) but gcc does not
                      1 Reply Last reply
                      1
                      0
                      • R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      • Login

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular
                      • World
                      • Users
                      • Groups