Re: Re: Stack based machines

"Pieter Koopman" <pieter@cs.kun.nl> said:


> > What is happening in the world of stack-based machines?
> > Are there any active groups working on processors or
> > compilers (I'm especially interested in functional languages).
>
> Many modern functional language implementations like Haskell
> (www.haskell.org) and Clean (www.cs.kun.nl/~clean) use stack-based
> abstract machines for their compilation schemes.


More than a few LPM users complain that the syntax is ugly, but I try
to remind them that since the patterns are compiled to an interpreted
machine at runtime, the reverse notation allows for efficient pattern
compilation, since each parameter is just pushed to a stack, and once
the last character is encountered, the entire clause is available for
compilation.


      % 2-5 'a' ; 'b' {NOCASE} !


"Match 2 to 5 hits from the sets 'a' or 'b', disregarding case."


It got enough response for ugliness that I added some predefined macros:


        <!('a' ; 'b', 2-5, NOCASE)>


Which just expands to the more easily parsed version under the hood.
Some would even have the more verbose macro "class" instead of the
bang...


        <class ('a' ; 'b', 2-5, NOCASE)>


--
Quinn Tyler Jackson


http://qtj.n3.net/~quinn/

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