|Compiler project needed firstname.lastname@example.org (Per Olesen) (2000-02-22)|
|Intermediate Language in Interpreter email@example.com (Nicolás) (2000-03-23)|
|Re: Intermediate Language in Interpreter firstname.lastname@example.org (Charles E. Bortle, Jr.) (2000-03-23)|
|Re: Intermediate Language in Interpreter email@example.com (Mihai Christodorescu) (2000-03-23)|
|Date:||23 Mar 2000 03:34:14 -0500|
|Organization:||Deja.com - Before you buy.|
|Keywords:||interpreter, question, comment|
Is it advisable to translate a parse tree of an interpreted language to a
simpler lang prior to really interpreting it ?
My intention is to practice most of the classic techniques of compiler
design in a plataform independant fashion, so I would like to be able
to translate programs of my Pascal-like language to a low level
representation, where I can exercise optimizing routines, but without
the inconvenience of machine-dependance. What would be even better,
would be to translate the programs to a low level languge which could
be avaluated by a "virtual machine", also written by me.
So, my question is what kind, or the characteristics, of languge is
convenient to be interpreted.
Also, the Dragon Book mentions triplets as an intermediate language. Is
this feasible to implement ?
[It's certainly feasible, but some kind of reverse polish is usually faster
to interpret. -John]
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.