Re: XML -> XSLt -> interpreter : silly question ?

fulster, etienne@magic.fr
on 28 Jan 2002 01:09:54 -0500


Posted certain code that had a legacy look to it, and listed a possible
transform of this code to XML like form. And then asked a few questions.


<<


1- can I accomplish that or is that totally foolish ?
2- what steps do I need to analyze then interpret this model ?
2- where can I find good resources that can guide me through that high
level technics.




>>


Generally, the translation of an old language to something like XML is
not too difficult, except that some of those old languages have very
intricate possible syntaxes because of the way they have evolved under
international standards committees.


So the basic translation can be done with common lexer and parser
tools, and there are many you can leads on in this newsgroup. But
hidden behind your question, I think, is the question "are certain
legacy computer languages easy targets for which to write grammars?"
Regrettably, in a few cases the answer is no.


You say that you need to extend an "existing language". Any language
we might have heard of, or is that a secret?


Concerning your question about how to "analyze then interpret this
model ". I am not sure of your meaning, but let me take a stab at it,
and of course invite you to interact offline by direct email should
you choose.


If you have a major legacy language that you want to write a grammar
for, that coding and testing task must be understood to be separate
from the task of writing an XML parser (if that is what you mean) to
interpret the XML 'intermediate' code that you generate.


You should find a way into existing code for the XML parser, and not
be shy about hunting down an available open source solution to your
front-end (legacy) language parsing requirement as well, unless your
target source language is something quite unique.


Best Wishes
Bob Rayhawk

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