Re: Compiler Deisgn.

dwight@pentasoft.com (Dwight VandenBerghe)
15 May 1998 22:33:22 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Compiler Deisgn. Matthew.Webb@net1.demon.co.uk (Matthew Webb) (1998-05-12)
Re: Compiler Deisgn. dwight@pentasoft.com (1998-05-15)
Re: Compiler Deisgn. abbottk@earthlink.net (Kirk Abbott) (1998-05-15)
Re: Compiler Deisgn. djg@argus.vki.bke.hu (Gabor DEAK JAHN) (1998-05-16)
Re: Compiler Deisgn. anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (1998-05-27)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: dwight@pentasoft.com (Dwight VandenBerghe)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 15 May 1998 22:33:22 -0400
Organization: All USENET -- http://www.Supernews.com
References: 98-05-058
Keywords: assembler, practice

On 12 May 1998 22:17:10 -0400, Matthew Webb
<Matthew.Webb@net1.demon.co.uk> wrote:


> I have written a disassembler and a comming assembler. I have not
>studied compiler design and so do not know the best way of doing it. My
>diassembler/assembler are bassically just one massive case statment on
>the bytes or text strings. The look identical but the reversed. They are
>just a single pass, nothing fancy.
>
>Can anyone give another structure other than a case statment please?


Hi Matt -


Do you know Perl? One easy way to move to the next step from where
you are now, without having to learn a huge amount about compilers
and lex and yacc and all that, is to rewrite your tools in perl and
use perl's built-in regular expressions to do the equivalent of
your case statements. Then, if you want more (expressions and
so on) there are modules that can be added in to help you.


Dwight
--

Post a followup to this message

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