Re: Suggestions required please ....
9 Apr 1999 14:08:03 -0400

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
Suggestions required please .... (1999-04-03)
Re: Suggestions required please .... (1999-04-06)
Re: Suggestions required please .... (Dobes Vandermeer) (1999-04-06)
Re: Suggestions required please .... (1999-04-09)
Re: Suggestions required please .... (1999-04-09)
Re: Suggestions required please .... (1999-04-10)
| List of all articles for this month |

Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 9 Apr 1999 14:08:03 -0400
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion
References: 99-04-015
Keywords: design (MarkAGr) wrote:
> I'm designing an OOA/OOD tool and have got to the point where I
> need to think of a prose representation for a UML-like methodology.
> I already have a very strong data description language, and have a
> comprehensive framework for FSMs - but need more work ( and will
> accept any constructive suggestions ) on a procedural definition
> language (PDL) to augment code that is automatically generated by
> other parts of the tool.
> The PDL will be translated into any other language the user
> requires .... (anything from english-prose embedded in HTML to
> assembly language) and so suffers that usual of tri-chotomies
> .... simplicity of understanding vs simplicty of design vs power of
> tool.
> Because of the nature of the project's translation technique used
> so far, I would like to be able to compile the PDL into a "semantic
> database / repository" and generate the final language output from
> that. Experience indicates that the language will reflect the internal
> structure of the repository and thus an information model may be the
> best/first port of call, however the repository may be created to
> reflect the language if the language is the right choice. I am willing
> to consider either and other possibilities.

HI, found your post and find it interesting, but complicated.

I'm working on a grammar tool similar to UN*X Lex that attempts to
generates a program on any language (Pascal, C, Java). It seems
similar to your problem.

So, let me traslate your question to english. ;-)

1. You have a grammar tool that reads a data description language

2. Will generate a program or library on another language (just "any"
language) like assembler, embedded, C, Java.

3. You NEED a intermediate language or intermediate code.

4. The intermediate language could be tri-chotomies, P-Code, a Procedural
Language Definition or any other suggestion.

5. The intermediate language will also define a data structure or repository
for the final language.

So, if that's the case, my suggestion will be :

1. Define (Create) a assembler-like intermediate language, with instructions
that incluide data definition, example :


2. Then, your tool must transform the source language to this more simpler
intermediate language.

3. And create a file that stores a group of text that is equivalent to each
instruction of your intermediate code.

4. Read each instruction and traslate it to the text equivalent.

This is my suggestion, hopes it helps. Good Luck.

rspartan <rspartan(a)>

Post a followup to this message

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