Re: Language design question

James Jones <jejones@microware.com>
15 Feb 2000 16:23:00 -0500

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Language design question flisakow@ricotta.cs.wisc.edu (2000-02-13)
Re: Language design question world!cfc@uunet.uu.net (Chris F Clark) (2000-02-13)
Re: Language design question jejones@microware.com (James Jones) (2000-02-15)
Re: Language design question flisakow@ricotta.cs.wisc.edu (2000-02-15)
Re: Language design question mkg@lanl.gov (2000-02-16)
Re: Language design question joachim.durchholz@halstenbach.com.or.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2000-02-16)
Re: Language design question joachim.durchholz@halstenbach.com.or.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2000-02-17)
Re: Language design question kst@cts.com (Keith Thompson) (2000-02-19)
Re: Language design question thp@roam-thp2.cs.ucr.edu (Tom Payne) (2000-02-19)
[4 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: James Jones <jejones@microware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 15 Feb 2000 16:23:00 -0500
Organization: Microware Systems Corporation
References: 00-02-065
Keywords: design, comment

The moderator is correct, it is a lot like Algol 68, where rather than
having an explicit dereference operator, you use casts to peel off the
number of REFs you want (so that instead of looking at how to get
where you want to go, you specify what you want after the smoke
clears). For example, given


LOC REF INT ri


in


ri := # something #


# something # had better have mode REF INT, and does what most folks
call "assigns something to ri"; in


REF INT (ri) := # something #


# something # had better have mode INT, and does what most folks call
"assigns something to what ri points at."


I think Mr. Flisakowski's language will need a similar facility.


James Jones


Shaun Flisakowski wrote:
> Does anyone see any problem with [not having an explicit dereference
> operator] that I'm overlooking?
> Are there any existing langues that handle this similarly?
>
> [This sounds a lot like Algol 68 coercion. -John]

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.