Related articles |
---|
What to put behind my front-end? m.helvensteijn@gmail.com (Michiel) (2008-08-17) |
Re: What to put behind my front-end? kamalpr@hp.com (kamal) (2008-08-17) |
Re: What to put behind my front-end? rich@pennware.com (Richard Pennington) (2008-08-20) |
From: | kamal <kamalpr@hp.com> |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
Date: | Sun, 17 Aug 2008 23:04:28 -0700 (PDT) |
Organization: | Compilers Central |
References: | 08-08-024 |
Keywords: | code |
Posted-Date: | 19 Aug 2008 22:18:24 EDT |
On Aug 17, 8:49 pm, Michiel <m.helvenste...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm working on a compiler for a new language with a colleague. I have
> described it briefly in an earlier thread (Number of compiler passes).
> ...
> I would like your opinions on which existing IL to use. Or perhaps someone
> could point me to a detailed comparison of ILs and back-ends.
>
> * It should be open source, because we plan to release the compiler under
> GNU GPL when it is ready.
>
> * Our compiler is written in C++, so if there is a back-end that takes some
> C/C++ structure, that might work. But I'm equally willing to use a textual
> intermediate representation, which would also have various advantages.
try this:-
http://gcc.gnu.org/projects/tree-ssa/#documentation
> * The language is still very limited, but we're slowly introducing the
> possibility for more complex custom data-structures, so the intermediate
> language should not be equally limited.
>
IMs are designed to abstract out the front-end, so that they can be re-
used for other front-ends.
> Denis Washington pointed me to LLVM, which seems a likely candidate. But I
> would like to make a more informed decision.
>
depends on whether you want to use LLVM's optimization framework.
regards
-kamal
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.