Re: Q: Intermediate code for interpreting & compiling?

Ryan Davis <davis@wln.com> wrote:
>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...


First I think you should look at the Self language. try
self-interest@self.stanford.edu This will help you with a lot
of ideas and implementation details.


I think the right language is directed annotated graphs. Thats
right I said language not intermediate language. The language should
be standardized. Tools to build the language, and manipulate it ride
on top. You can have a lexical tool that looks like a conventional
language, you can have various graphical tools. The language can
be interpreted, turned to code, turned to documents etc.


Other good places to look for ideas are Beta and CLOS.


I've learned that real programming projects are a lot more than just
code, they must produce documents, test streams, installation streams,
etc. If all these things are separate they will diverge. Directed
annotated graphs are the only language general enough to hold all
the pieces.
--

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