> ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Luke Palmer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 4:46 AM > Subject: Re: approaching python > > > > Klass-jan wrote: > > > Maybe it's not possible to have the eval instruction right away, in the > new > > > Python->IMC code generator. As long as this command is not used in the > code > > > for this new code generator, this can just be skipped, and it may be > > > implemented in IMC by hand, and inserted into the new code generator > > > (Python->IMC, written in IMC) > > > > Well, is the Python parser written in Python? If so, then we have a > > bootstrapping problem... but since there is already a good bootstrap > > program (the python executable), there's no problem at all. > > > I'm sorry, but I can't see this boostrapping problem. Do I overlook > something? > Could you explain?
I said "problem" rhetorically. There's no problem, because we have a bootstrap already. > It isn't necessary to implement the complete language, is it? As long as the > features needed to write the compiler are implemented, it's no problem (i.e. > halfbootstrapping). Depends on how much of Python is written in Python. The more, the better in this case. Everything that is written in Python we can support by just writing a code generator. There are inevitably big parts of python written in C that aren't written in Python (OS-interfaces, for instance), and those we need to rewrite or build a compatibility layer. I see a compatibility layer as a huge job, so we could just do those parts by hand... for now. Luke
