|Compiler Design + feedback email@example.com (Philip Herron) (2009-04-21)|
|Re: Compiler Design + feedback cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com (Chris F Clark) (2009-04-21)|
|Re: Compiler Design + feedback firstname.lastname@example.org (Philip Herron) (2009-04-22)|
|Re: Compiler Design + feedback email@example.com (russell kym horsell) (2009-04-23)|
|Re: Compiler Design + feedback firstname.lastname@example.org (Pertti Kellomaki) (2009-04-24)|
|Re: PCC, was Compiler Design + feedback email@example.com (Jonathan Thornburg) (2009-04-25)|
|Re: PCC, was Compiler Design + feedback firstname.lastname@example.org (toby) (2009-05-10)|
|Re: PCC, was Compiler Design + feedback email@example.com (Marco van de Voort) (2009-05-12)|
|From:||Philip Herron <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Date:||Wed, 22 Apr 2009 10:48:35 +0100|
|Posted-Date:||24 Apr 2009 06:46:44 EDT|
Thanks a lot of that, i am starting to get the hang of all the ideas
at the moment i have been reading though how make works and python
etc. And got the book "Compilers - Principles Techniques & Tools". It
helped me a lot there recently! But it seems to focus too much on
compiler front-ends for my needs.
> Chris Clark Internet: email@example.com
> One attribute grammar system even minimized the number of passes. You
> write your grammar using the equations that solve your problem and the
> tool figures out the interdependencies and organizes the passes so
> that it computes them in as few passes as possible.
But i started to see about really getting bison to do much more work
for me. As in splitting up my code syntax much much more into an
easier syntax tree and to get it to do as much code reading as
possible which is starting to work for me.
> Running passes over an intermediate (often tree-like) representation
> of a source text, is such a powerful idea that it is formalized in
> attribute grammars and the visitor pattern and tree rewriting systems
> and probably a dozen other ways.
But reading on more i starting to realize what i meant to do as in i
my idea to make like a map etc.. what i meant was like a symbol-table
and then from that i can do like a 3 address code to see what i want
to do and control the flow.
I read that gcc's intermediate language is gimple and this is how llvm
plugs into gcc. Is this the main approach onto plugging in custom
front ends into gcc's back-end or have a read it wrong? I think i
would like to experiment in the future with gcc's back-end and write a
new front-end language in my spare time.
But i was also wondering are there any 'young' compiler projects. As
in ones less mature and easier to get involved in rather than gcc. It
might give me more experience to be able to learn more. I don't mind
what language the front-end would be but i would just like to see what
way people work their compiler projects and many contribute some
cleanup patches to the project to get a little involved.
Thanks a lot guys! Any feedback on my language would be greatly
appreciated as much bad feedback would be good to see where my
potential pit-falls could be in my language, not that i want you guys
to rip me apart ;).
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.