Front page | perl.perl6.internals.api.parser |
Postings from December 2000
Simon Cozens <simon@cozens.net> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 08:42:57PM -0500, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote: > > I believe that to do a true port to the JVM (e.g., supporting > > eval($STRING)), we'll need to implement a bootstrapping parser for the > > parser code in Java. > Uhm, and then in every other language we port it to. Are you *sure* that's > the right approach? I have looked for another solution, but I can't seem to find one that is any easier. Depending on how the bootstrapping parser that we write in C is write, it might be possible to have it generate Java code. Or, if someone writes a reliable JVM backend for gcc.... But, these are big if's. How else can we handle eval($string) on the JVM if we don't have a parser that runs natively on the JVM? (Note, for embedded JVM's, calling back to the C code is likely not an option). > > My concern is that the more integrated the lexer, parser and tokenizer are > > integrated, the harder it will be to reimplement in other languages. > Why? It's just code. I can't understand why porting one big bit of code is > insurmountably more difficult than porting three slightly smaller bits. It just seemed that if there were are already existing component modules modules in a given language, it might be easier to adapt them if the walls between these components were better. As I said, these discussions are vague, so I am not sure how it might be effected; I was just voicing a (possibly unnecessary) concern. -- Bradley M. Kuhn - http://www.ebb.org/bkuhnThread Previous | Thread Next