Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.
| Related articles |
|---|
| re: Bliss-11 mark.mickelsen@comcast.net (Mark Mickelsen) (2006-11-19) |
| Re: Bliss-11 jle@ural.owlnet.rice.edu (2006-11-20) |
| Re: Bliss-11 Juergen.KahrsDELETETHIS@vr-web.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=FCrgen_Kahrs?=) (2006-11-20) |
| Re: Bliss-11 148f3wg02@sneakemail.com (Karsten Nyblad) (2006-11-20) |
| From: | Karsten Nyblad <148f3wg02@sneakemail.com> |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| Date: | 20 Nov 2006 17:45:54 -0500 |
| Organization: | Compilers Central |
| References: | 06-11-083 06-11-086 |
| Keywords: | history, comment |
| Posted-Date: | 20 Nov 2006 17:45:54 EST |
Jason Lee Eckhardt wrote:
> It wouldn't be too difficult to write a BLISS-* frontend for
> the GNU compiler, as there is now a standard AST/IL that one can
> target. This also means you'll get a full optimizer and numerous
> back-ends "for free", so you won't have to write that yourself.
> You could do the same with another infrastructure such as LLVM,
> although LLVM has support for fewer target machines.
There is already a project on doing that. Check out Wikipedias page on
BLISS and look for the FreeVMS version of BLISS
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLISS.) Wikipedia has a number of other
references of interest for BLISS lovers. You may also try asking the
question in the comp.os.vms usenet group.
And to Mark Mickelsen: BLISS-10 and BLISS-11 is for PDP-10 and PDP-11,
respectively. Which of the two has your interest?
Karsten Nyblad
148f3wg02 at sneakemail dot com
[You know, Bliss was an OK language but no better than the ones we use
now. The data structures were done through macros which were very
flexible but painful to use. -John]
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.