Re: Language Design

"" <>
Thu, 4 Aug 2011 18:43:58 -0700 (PDT)

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[5 earlier articles]
Re: Language Design (mac) (2011-07-23)
Re: Language Design (Christophe de Dinechin) (2011-07-23)
Re: Language Design (Oleg Sesov) (2011-07-23)
Re: Language Design (Gene) (2011-07-26)
Re: Language Design (tm) (2011-07-27)
Re: Language Design (Roberto Waltman) (2011-07-28)
Re: Language Design ( (2011-08-04)
Re: Language Design (2011-08-08)
Language design David.Chase@Eng.Sun.COM (1991-09-04)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: "" <>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 18:43:58 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 11-07-027
Keywords: design
Posted-Date: 04 Aug 2011 22:15:10 EDT

On Jul 18, 3:16 pm, Billy Mays
<> wrote:
> I am trying to design a programming language for a simple processor
> (16 bit, ~10 instructions, 16 registers). I am not sure what a
> language actually needs in order to be more useful than pure assembly,
> but is also reasonable to implement.

I'd list the top three as: consistant, readable, provide high level
flow control constructs.

You can get that with assembly language and a separate macro pre-

> I had originally tried to make a RPN style language where the language
> is purely stack based, but I realized it wouldn't be Turing complete.
> I'd rather not just re implement C or other commonly used languages,
> but I'm having a hard time coming up with something I'd actually want
> to use.
> Any advice for a newbie?

No one has mentioned Grimley Evans's bcompiler.

It is actually several step-wise compilers to bootstrap his BCC
compiler, from nothing.

He borrows the stream i/o convenience of linux; stdin, stdout,
redirection to/from a file and the elf file format.


Anyway, food for thought..


Post a followup to this message

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