Robert Feldt wrote: > I'm playing around with different designs to implement VM's (in a > functional style). Think for parsing, FSM etc. > > One of the simpler I've come up with uses normal clojure funcs for > each instruction to the vm. They all take the state as a map as input > and then additional arguments. They all return the delta for the > state. The delta is then merged into the main state in a reduce. A > program for the VM is a collection of instructions where a keyword > names the func. In code: > > > Any comments on this? Are there better/standard Lisp/Clojure ways of > implementing VMs? Feels clunky to have to use map accessors all over > and to return delta state. Well, the "classical" functional way of writing a language implementation is to use continuation passing style. Since you always pass one the new state to the waiting continuation you never need to keep any explicit state around.
Cheers -- Ola Bini (http://olabini.com) JRuby Core Developer Developer, ThoughtWorks Studios (http://studios.thoughtworks.com) Practical JRuby on Rails (http://apress.com/book/view/9781590598818) "Yields falsehood when quined" yields falsehood when quined. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
