Talk:TCC

How is this a FASM/TCC barebones article?

"Fasm-TCC BareBones" redirects here, but the reader is just presented with a description of TCC. I was expecting to find something similar to Bare Bones but oriented to FASM and TCC. --MessiahAndrw 21:45, 15 January 2012 (CST)

There shouldn't be a seperate Bare Bones for every combination of assembler / compiler. I would have deleted the page outright (since there was very little information on FASM included), but felt that TCC has some intrinsic value (compared to the heavyweight GCC), so I left that half of the page as information on that noteable.

I will remove the redirect next thing; I agree that is confusing.

We have, in Bare Bones and C++ Bare Bones, sections for both GAS syntax and NASM syntax. If you feel that FASM is both important and different enough to be added to that, feel free to do so. What little information there was about FASM can be found in this version of the article; it should be adapted so that it resembles the other two source snippets as closely as they resemble each other. (Structure, comments, etc.) -- Solar 06:01, 16 January 2012 (CST)

Should we keep this?

This page was created in August 2009 by user Tommy, and never edited again. Right now I don't see how it adds much of value over Bare Bones. I'd rather have the FASM listing integrated in Bare Bones, and the information on TCC on a seperate page (possibly with a cross-compiler / porting tutorial, if it is so easy on dependencies?). Any opinions? -- Solar 14:58, 12 December 2011 (UTC)