|Interpreters & Intermediate languages email@example.com (1994-04-13)|
|Re: Interpreters & Intermediate languages firstname.lastname@example.org (1994-04-13)|
|Re: Interpretersn & Intermediate languages email@example.com (1994-04-14)|
|Re: Interpreters & Intermediate languages firstname.lastname@example.org (1994-04-19)|
|Re: Interpreters & Intermediate languages email@example.com (1994-04-21)|
|Re: Interpreters & Intermediate languages firstname.lastname@example.org (Bryan O'Sullivan) (1994-04-22)|
|From:||email@example.com (Elan Feingold)|
|Keywords:||interpreter, translator, question, comment|
|Organization:||Cornell Theory Center|
|Date:||Wed, 13 Apr 1994 16:40:16 GMT|
I'm looking to write a fast emulator for the Z80. I want to use dynamic
translation. I could translate to 8086 machine code, but this would limit
the portability. I would like to use an intermediate language that would
give me greater speed than regular emulation, but much more portability
than machine language --> machine language. Does anyone have any
suggestions, references, pointers, etc? I am having trouble imagining an
interpreter for an intermediate language running any faster than a pure
emulator, so I must be missing something...
Thanks in advance,
| Elan Feingold
| CS/EE Depts.
| Cornell University
| Ithaca NY 14850
[I would be astonished to hear that any translate+interpret strategy was
significantly better than interpreting individual instructions. I expect
you could do the machine language translations from tables, so reworking
the tables would be most of the work of porting to another target system.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.