On Wed, 21 Apr 2021, 20:11 Peng Yu, <pengyu.ut@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Is this for windows? Do people use gcc for Windows? > Yes. > > and 1) it is > > too error-prone especially on arguments that contain spaces, and 2) it is > > undesirable to have to > > place more incompatibility and limitation (e.g. number of bytes in a > single command line) just > > because of the shell being used, but not of GCC itself, and 3) it is > indeed very slow if `fork()` is > > That is the misconcept I mentioned before. To improve the speeds shell > scripts should be sourced (then call functions defined in it, which > can be used many times without much overhead) instead of used as a > standalone program. The speedup can be 10~100 x depending on the > situation. > So you're suggesting that GCC should replace the gcc and g++ drivers with shell scripts that should be sourced using . rather than executed? I'm not sure how that works be an improvement. It would probably be possible, but it would not be practical (as mentioned, not all systems that GCC runs on have a good shell). The GCC drivers do a lot more than just launch other processes, so "shell scripts are good for launching other processes" isn't a good enough reason to do it. Also "shell scripts are easier to maintain" is subjective, and unless you've actually worked with the gcc code you are probably not going to convince anybody it would be an improvement. "I haven't looked at this code but it would be better if you completely rewrote it" is not a very persuasive argument. >
