|Syntax directed compilation firstname.lastname@example.org (Barry Kelly) (2007-05-26)|
|Re: Syntax directed compilation email@example.com (Aaron Gray) (2007-05-28)|
|Re: Syntax directed compilation firstname.lastname@example.org (Steven Nichols) (2007-05-28)|
|Re: Syntax directed compilation email@example.com (2007-05-29)|
|Re: Syntax directed compilation cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com (Chris F Clark) (2007-05-29)|
|Re: Syntax directed compilation firstname.lastname@example.org (Matthew X. Economou) (2007-05-31)|
|Re: Syntax directed compilation email@example.com (Barry Kelly) (2007-06-20)|
|From:||Barry Kelly <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Date:||Wed, 20 Jun 2007 22:03:32 +0100|
Barry Kelly wrote:
> I recall, a long time back on this group, people pointing out that
> languages supporting redefinable or user extensible grammars have
> never taken off
> Has there been research in this area that I've missed on my searches
> (using 'syntax directed compilation' as my main phrase)?
Replying to my own post, because I've found some interesting related
work not previously mentioned:
"Katahdin is a programming language where the syntax and semantics are
mutable at runtime."
"New constructs such as expressions and statements can be defined, or a
new language can be implemented from scratch. It is built as an
interpreter on the Mono implementation of the .NET framework. "
Public domain source is available from that site.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.