Related articles |
---|
Q: Intermediate code for interpreting & compiling? davis@wln.com (1995-02-10) |
Re: Q: Intermediate code for interpreting & compiling? torbenm@diku.dk (1995-02-14) |
Re: Q: Intermediate code for interpreting & compiling? cef@geodesic.com (Charles Fiterman) (1995-02-14) |
Re: Q: Intermediate code for interpreting & compiling? danhicks@aol.com (1995-02-22) |
Re: Q: Intermediate code for interpreting & compiling? Dave@occl-cam.demon.co.uk (Dave Lloyd) (1995-02-24) |
Re: Q: Intermediate code for interpreting & compiling? zmola@cicero.spc.uchicago.edu (1995-02-24) |
Re: Q: Intermediate code for interpreting & compiling? davidm@Rational.COM (1995-02-28) |
[1 later articles] |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
From: | davis@wln.com (Ryan Davis) |
Keywords: | interpreter, question |
Organization: | WLN |
Date: | Fri, 10 Feb 1995 18:29:57 GMT |
I am looking for some type of solution to a problem that I think arises
enough. I am programming a language that will act much like smalltalk,
namely, that it will be incrementally compiled into some form of
intermediate code that will later be compiled OR interpreted. I would like
it to be as generic (i.e. platform independant) as possible as I only
really want to write it once and recompile on multiple machines with as
little tweaking as possible... C is not a valid intermediate because then
I would be implementing 2 languages at once and I'm not up to that yet...
(Student, ya know...) that, and I think it would be easier to bring it to
a lower level than that...
Any solutions? Any suggestions?
http://www.wln.com/~davis \ / davis@wln.com
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.