|Compiler Deisgn. Matthew.Webb@net1.demon.co.uk (Matthew Webb) (1998-05-12)|
|Re: Compiler Deisgn. firstname.lastname@example.org (1998-05-15)|
|Re: Compiler Deisgn. email@example.com (Kirk Abbott) (1998-05-15)|
|Re: Compiler Deisgn. firstname.lastname@example.org (Gabor DEAK JAHN) (1998-05-16)|
|Re: Compiler Deisgn. email@example.com (1998-05-27)|
|From:||firstname.lastname@example.org (Dwight VandenBerghe)|
|Date:||15 May 1998 22:33:22 -0400|
|Organization:||All USENET -- http://www.Supernews.com|
On 12 May 1998 22:17:10 -0400, Matthew Webb
> I have written a disassembler and a comming assembler. I have not
>studied compiler design and so do not know the best way of doing it. My
>diassembler/assembler are bassically just one massive case statment on
>the bytes or text strings. The look identical but the reversed. They are
>just a single pass, nothing fancy.
>Can anyone give another structure other than a case statment please?
Hi Matt -
Do you know Perl? One easy way to move to the next step from where
you are now, without having to learn a huge amount about compilers
and lex and yacc and all that, is to rewrite your tools in perl and
use perl's built-in regular expressions to do the equivalent of
your case statements. Then, if you want more (expressions and
so on) there are modules that can be added in to help you.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.