|Compiler 101 email@example.com (Jon Masterson) (2005-01-22)|
|Re: Compiler 101 firstname.lastname@example.org (2005-01-24)|
|Re: Compiler 101 email@example.com (Laurence Finston) (2005-01-24)|
|Re: Compiler 101 firstname.lastname@example.org (Jon Masterson) (2005-01-24)|
|Re: Compiler 101 email@example.com (Jon Masterson) (2005-01-30)|
|Re: Compiler 101 firstname.lastname@example.org (Nobodyzhome) (2005-01-30)|
|Re: Compiler 101 email@example.com (2005-02-18)|
|Re: Compiler 101 firstname.lastname@example.org (email@example.com) (2005-02-28)|
|From:||firstname.lastname@example.org (Anton Ertl)|
|Date:||24 Jan 2005 10:58:30 -0500|
|Organization:||Institut fuer Computersprachen, Technische Universitaet Wien|
Jon Masterson <email@example.com> writes:
>At the moment, for example,
>I cannot allow nesting as I have no clue as to how to handle that now.
>I'm not particularly worried about converting the intermediate code
>into machine code due to the nature of the target which is very
>specific. I am very interested in the approaches to parsing, syntax
>checking and analysing the source.
That's not very interpreter-specific. You can read the front-end part
of any compiler text for that.
>I have recollections of using postfix notation and a stack last time
>but, as mentioned, it is all rather blurred....8-)
I guess you used a stack-based virtual machine as interface between
the front end and back end.
You might be interested in Vmgen
<http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/vmgen/>, which includes an
example of an interpreter for a small Modula-style language.
M. Anton Ertl
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.