riscv-gnu-toolchain VS risc-v-examples

> no absurdely and grotesquely massive and complex compilers anywhere

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, and anyway there's not even an absence: https://github.com/riscv-collab/riscv-gnu-toolchain https://llvm.org/docs/RISCVUsage.html

> feature creeps on computer language syntax nowhere to be found

At least one of us is very confused, and in case it's me, how do language details matter to RISC-V?

I then looked at the .cargo/config.toml provided by the guide and saw that it wasn't actually statically compiling the code. After a bit of tinkering and building my own toolchain from here, I ended up with this config.toml file:

b) collabriscv - essentially gcc 12.2 + binutils master/2.40 as per https://github.com/riscv-collab/riscv-gnu-toolchain

Or would it be better to take what is in https://github.com/riscv-collab/riscv-gnu-toolchain which is gcc 12.2 and start from there?

I'm not able to build https://github.com/riscv-collab/riscv-gnu-toolchain.git like this:

Your next step of launching into the subset of C that you can provide totally on your own,but setting up enough of the environment for it to really be like C (e.g. no printf, but you can write loops and do math stuff and honk on hardware bits) will probably look closer to this: https://github.com/robertlipe/risc-v-examples/tree/main/qemu-boot ...which I totally should have looked at BEFORE writing the above from scratch.