Re: Writing Assembler!

rick@tip.nl (rickn)
25 May 1997 13:43:44 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[4 earlier articles]
Re: Writing Assembler! bullock@pcae.hep.phy.cam.ac.uk (Ben Bullock) (1997-05-17)
Re: Writing Assembler! adrian@dcs.rhbnc.ac.uk (1997-05-17)
Re: Writing Assembler! csusb@csv.warwick.ac.uk (Mr J R Hall) (1997-05-22)
Re: Writing Assembler! jukkaj@ping.at (JUKKA) (1997-05-22)
Re: Writing Assembler! cef@geodesic.com (Charles Fiterman) (1997-05-22)
Re: Writing Assembler! mark@omnifest.uwm.edu (1997-05-25)
Re: Writing Assembler! rick@tip.nl (1997-05-25)
Re: Writing Assembler! jukkaj@ping.at (JUKKA) (1997-06-09)
Re: Writing Assembler! mark@omnifest.uwm.edu (1997-06-09)
Re: Writing Assembler! mark@omnifest.uwm.edu (1997-06-09)
Re: Writing Assembler! landon@netcom.com (1997-06-11)
Re: Writing Assembler! cliffc@risc.sps.mot.com (Cliff Click) (1997-06-11)
Re: Writing Assembler! albaugh@agames.com (1997-06-13)
[6 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: rick@tip.nl (rickn)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 25 May 1997 13:43:44 -0400
Organization: The Internet Plaza
References: 97-05-156 97-05-245
Keywords: assembler, comment

"JUKKA" <jukkaj@ping.at> wrote:
>You can use lot of from compiler books when making the assembler
>scanner and parser. In assemblers you should treat also end of lines
>and spaces as tokens and not just skip them.


Why that ? Spaces does not seem to mean anything for asm... Even
worse: since the number of possible instructions and fields are so
limited why not use a lookup table with all of it ? Anyway I am using
it in the assembler I am building in QBASIC and it seems to work out
great. Scanning and parsing seems to me a waste in this case ...


RIck
[The reason I like to use something like yacc is that I can be confident
that it will diagnose syntax errors. Hand-written parsers often let
unanticipated bad syntax fall through the cracks. -John]
--

Post a followup to this message

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