Re: HELP: Using an abstract syntax tree for semantic checking

"Daniel C. Wang" <danwang+news@CS.Princeton.EDU>
12 May 1998 22:18:55 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[2 earlier articles]
Re: HELP: Using an abstract syntax tree for semantic checking dwight@pentasoft.com (1998-05-07)
Re: HELP: Using an abstract syntax tree for semantic checking rod.bates@wichita.boeing.com (Rodney M. Bates) (1998-05-07)
Re: HELP: Using an abstract syntax tree for semantic checking thetick@magelang.com (1998-05-07)
Re: HELP: Using an abstract syntax tree for semantic checking donham@linex.com (Jake Donham) (1998-05-07)
Re: HELP: Using an abstract syntax tree for semantic checking ndc@alum.mit.edu (N. D. Culver) (1998-05-07)
Re: HELP: Using an abstract syntax tree for semantic checking adrian@dcs.rhbnc.ac.uk (1998-05-07)
Re: HELP: Using an abstract syntax tree for semantic checking danwang+news@CS.Princeton.EDU (Daniel C. Wang) (1998-05-12)
Re: HELP: Using an abstract syntax tree for semantic checking cfc@world.std.com (Chris F Clark) (1998-05-12)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "Daniel C. Wang" <danwang+news@CS.Princeton.EDU>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 12 May 1998 22:18:55 -0400
Organization: Princeton University
References: 98-05-004 98-05-053
Keywords: semantics

"N. D. Culver" <ndc@alum.mit.edu> writes:


> > Is it worth my time to construct a true abstract syntax
> > tree rather than a parse tree?
>
> Yes, you will find that the AST is much easier to deal with in a
> multi-pass environment.


For those interested in generating code for building constructing ASTs in C,
C++, and Java from a high level description. It'll probably be worth your
while to take a peek at


http://www.cs.princeton.edu/zephyr/ASDL


It's still being developed so feedback from brave souls would be much
appreciated.
--

Post a followup to this message

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