Re: The compilation approach in modern languages

jle@ural.owlnet.rice.edu (Jason Lee Eckhardt)
20 Feb 2005 16:48:37 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[10 earlier articles]
Re: The compilation approach in modern languages rbates@southwind.net (Rodney M. Bates) (2005-02-16)
Re: The compilation approach in modern languages gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2005-02-16)
Re: The compilation approach in modern languages torbenm@diku.dk (2005-02-18)
Re: The compilation approach in modern languages dot@dotat.at (Tony Finch) (2005-02-18)
Re: The compilation approach in modern languages hannah@schlund.de (2005-02-18)
Re: The compilation approach in modern languages boldyrev@cgitftp.uiggm.nsc.ru (Ivan Boldyrev) (2005-02-18)
Re: The compilation approach in modern languages jle@ural.owlnet.rice.edu (2005-02-20)
Re: The compilation approach in modern languages gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2005-02-28)
Re: The compilation approach in modern languages anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (2005-02-28)
Re: The compilation approach in modern languages gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2005-03-01)
Re: The compilation approach in modern languages boldyrev@cgitftp.uiggm.nsc.ru (Ivan Boldyrev) (2005-03-04)
Re: The compilation approach in modern languages anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (2005-03-05)
Re: The compilation approach in modern languages hannah@schlund.de (2005-05-18)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: jle@ural.owlnet.rice.edu (Jason Lee Eckhardt)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 20 Feb 2005 16:48:37 -0500
Organization: Rice University, Houston, TX
References: 05-02-053 05-02-065 05-02-076 05-02-078
Keywords: interpreter, code
Posted-Date: 20 Feb 2005 16:48:37 EST

>A less mainstream language is MetaML, which does do runtime code
>generation on partial applcations, if these are typed so the first
>argument has an earlier binding time than the latter. The generated
>code is for a virtual machine, which AFAIK is interpreted. Several
>functional languages running on virtual machines also have support for
>runtime code generation, but this is done explicitly rather than
>implicitly on partial applications. And unlike MetaML, you don't get
>type safety on generated code.


    Also checkout a slightly more "mainstream" alternative to MetaML,
    called MetaOCaml. This language provides support for "multi-stage
    programming"-- the ability to construct, combine, and execute code
    at runtime (where all such future-stage computations are type safe).
    It is built on the popular OCaml system and can be obtained from:
        www.metaocaml.org.



Post a followup to this message

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