Re: Implementing a stack-based interpreter

cvrebert@gmail.com wrote:
> I know this is comp.compilers, but since there isn't a
> comp.interpreters, I figure this is the right place to ask.
> I'm trying write an interpreter for a programming language but haven't
> been able to find anything on how to write a stack-based interpreter.
> If anyone could point me to a book/website I'd be much obliged.
> Thanks again.
> - Chris
> [Compile to a string of reverse polish operators, then interpret that string
> pushing results on the stack and popping operands off the stack. -John]


Take a look at Forth; it is a stack based language. Newsgroup is over at
comp.lang.forth; there are also quite a lot of forth implementations,
from public domain to polished professional. There's a webring at
http://t.webring.com/hub?ring=forth, and a FAQ at
http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html.


One stack isn't quite enough, btw, unless you're interpreter is for a
simple RPN calculator; Forth uses two, one for data and one for return
addresses of called subroutines (called words in Forth).
--
Regards
Alex McDonald
[One stack is enough if you have a simple enough procedure call without
variable length argument lists and the like. -John]

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