|Third party compiler middle and back-end email@example.com (Daniel Zazula) (2010-10-08)|
|Re: Third party compiler middle and back-end firstname.lastname@example.org (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2010-10-10)|
|Re: Third party compiler middle and back-end email@example.com (Mike Playle) (2010-10-10)|
|Re: Third party compiler middle and back-end firstname.lastname@example.org (Philip Herron) (2010-10-10)|
|Re: Third party compiler middle and back-end email@example.com (BGB / cr88192) (2010-10-10)|
|Re: Third party compiler middle and back-end firstname.lastname@example.org (Jean-Marc Bourguet) (2010-10-11)|
|Re: Third party compiler middle and back-end email@example.com (James O. Williams) (2010-10-11)|
|Re: Third party compiler middle and back-end firstname.lastname@example.org (George Neuner) (2010-10-12)|
|Re: Third party compiler middle and back-end bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com (Robert A Duff) (2010-10-13)|
|Re: Third party compiler middle and back-end email@example.com (BGB / cr88192) (2010-10-13)|
|[11 later articles]|
|From:||Philip Herron <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Date:||Sun, 10 Oct 2010 14:22:12 +0100|
|Keywords:||code, tools, GCC|
|Posted-Date:||11 Oct 2010 00:33:40 EDT|
On 9 October 2010 03:57, Daniel Zazula <email@example.com> wrote:
> I want to write a compiler that generates assembly, but I do not know
> assembly, I've already started studying the FASM, but it will take
> much time to learn everything I need to know in order to write a
> decent back-end.
> So I though about using a third party back-end, I would write the
> front-end that parse the language into a intermediate code and leave
> the rest to the back-end. I gave a look at GCC but it is too big, too
> vast and too complex for what I want. Microsoft's Phoenix also don't
> work for me since it generates CIL.
> The back-end that I'm looking for needs to generate at least x86
> Assembly (although I prefer Amd64), I don't mind if it generates other
> assemblies as well. I prefer back-ends written in C# or Object Pascal,
> but I will also accept C/C++ ones.
Gcc isn't as 'vast and as complex as you think' my GSOC project was to
write a python front-end which i am still working on and many people
since it have started writing their own front-ends and the best part
is along with the help of the community we have worked to build up and
flesh out the gcc-front-end documentation. Its not all finished but it
will most definetly be more than enough to get someone started.
I would highly reccomend gcc over llvm for language development any
day. GCC you have much more freedom in how you want to build your
front-end llvm is very tied up i've found.
For more info on my stuff check out:
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/PythonFrontEnd dont expect the python fe to be
100% its actually got alot more features working than some may think,
but my lexer is extremely buggy and i dont really have the
patients/time to work on it for a while since i am more interested in
getting more of the core stuff working fully.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.