Re: Parsing partial sentences
Fri, 28 Apr 2017 16:32:38 -0700 (PDT)

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[12 earlier articles]
Re: Parsing partial sentences (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2017-04-12)
Re: Parsing partial sentences (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2017-04-20)
Re: Parsing partial sentences (George Neuner) (2017-04-21)
Re: Parsing partial sentences (Walter Banks) (2017-04-27)
Re: Parsing partial sentences (Kaz Kylheku) (2017-04-27)
Re: Parsing partial sentences (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2017-04-28)
Re: Parsing partial sentences (2017-04-28)
Re: Parsing partial sentences (Marco van de Voort) (2017-04-29)
Re: Parsing partial sentences (Kaz Kylheku) (2017-04-30)
| List of all articles for this month |

Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 16:32:38 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 17-04-001 17-04-023 17-04-024
Injection-Info:; posting-host=""; logging-data="47662"; mail-complaints-to=""
Keywords: parse
Posted-Date: 29 Apr 2017 09:00:10 EDT


On Thursday, April 27, 2017 at 8:15:18 PM UTC-5, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> If we allow Pascal to be extended with a macro preprocessor,
> I believe I could design a system for translating C to Pascal which
> handles some macros, translating them to Pascal macros. Even some
> macros that "break" syntactic boundaries, such as "list_for_each (var,
> list) { block }".

Doug Comer wrote MAP (macro preprocessor) in 1978-9 for CDC Pascal.
(Pascal Users Group [PUG], Pascal News #17, March 1980, pages 30..40)

Free Pascal already has a preprocessor (and simple macros):

> I don't believe such a project has any value beyond getting
> a pat on the back from another developer; I wouldn't spend any
> time on such a thing.

Well, in fairness, regarding your posts in comp.lang.misc three
years ago ("Wirth-ian languages"), you don't seem sympathetic
overall. I do think you underestimate their continued relevance.

> The end result might well be rejected by some
> Pascal users, due to requiring the extended dialect, whether on
> ideological grounds,

In fairness, with so many Pascal compilers and dialects and deviances
from the standards, I think most "Pascal" users are already
accustomed to various quirks.

> or on practical issues with tooling (being able to get the
> preprocessor running in a given Pascal development environment).

Keep in mind that several Pascal-to-C converters already exist (of
varying quality). It might be wiser to look at what's already been
done. I can find at least three. (Not quite the reverse but similar.)

Not sure what you mean about tooling, but FPC is quite portable, so
that isn't the main problem here.

I don't wish to discourage the OP. Certainly it's not an easy task.
Here's yet another document I stumbled upon years ago that may help:

Post a followup to this message

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