Re: Two pass compiler for a language similar to Java

Joan Jesús Pujol Espinar <joanpujol@gmail.com> wrote


> I'm doing a pseudocode language similar to Java (it is posible to use
> things before are defined).
> I know (or I think ;) ) that the best way to manage this is with two
> pass using ASTs. And is the strategy that I'm using.


A procedural language does require a 2-pass compiler.


> But only for curiosity, it's possible to do the semantic analysis of my
> language in a syntatic directed compiler with only one pass. The
> strategy will be to put in the symbol table what you are waiting to get
> and when you find the definition compare if what are you waiting is what
> is defined... It's a lot more dificult, but it's posible, or there are
> problems that I can't see?


How will you identify errors in function parameters? A symbol table
isn't the only one that needs to deal with yet-to-be-encountered
stuff.


> A lot of thanks in advance and excuseme for my little english.


If you want an interpreter -it makes sense to go in for a 1-pass
compiler. Else, 2-pass is what one would use.


regards
-kamal

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