On Oct 4, 2005, at 5:11 AM, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
On Oct 4, 2005, at 3:52, Will Coleda wrote:
On Oct 3, 2005, at 6:34 PM, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
I don't see the point. Your compiler can emit, e.g.:
"while"(test, body)
That's actually how things work right now (very similar to
On Oct 4, 2005, at 3:52, Will Coleda wrote:
On Oct 3, 2005, at 6:34 PM, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
I don't see the point. Your compiler can emit, e.g.:
"while"(test, body)
That's actually how things work right now (very similar to the
interpreter from previous versions).
Not quite:
$
On Oct 3, 2005, at 6:34 PM, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
On Oct 3, 2005, at 22:57, Will Coleda wrote:
3) Keep a global counter that is incremented whenever a procedure
is created or rename'd. When generating the compiled code, key
against this counter - if it's changed, we must fall back to th
On 10/3/05, Will Coleda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Committed: partcl is now now a compiler. Though some tests still fail
> (leo fixed one of the unicode issues)
>
> t/cmd_global.t 3 768 63 50.00% 2-4
> t/cmd_proc.t 4 1024114 36.36% 3-4 8-9
> t/cmd_return.t
On Oct 3, 2005, at 22:57, Will Coleda wrote:
3) Keep a global counter that is incremented whenever a procedure is
created or rename'd. When generating the compiled code, key against
this counter - if it's changed, we must fall back to the interpreted
version. (which, although it starts out wi
Committed: partcl is now now a compiler. Though some tests still fail
(leo fixed one of the unicode issues)
t/cmd_global.t 3 768 63 50.00% 2-4
t/cmd_proc.t 4 1024114 36.36% 3-4 8-9
t/cmd_return.t 1 256 21 50.00% 1
t/cmd_string.t 2 5
On Oct 2, 2005, at 1:40 AM, Will Coleda wrote:
I've attached the generated PIR output for the sample program,
which outputs "10"
set a 0
while {$a < 10} {
incr a
}
puts $a
Ok, technically, it's not the output of a complete PIR program, it's
the concatenated output of several chunks. O
The simple version of the compiler is now mostly done in my sandbox:
Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed
---
t/cmd_global.t 3 768 63 50.00% 2-4
t/cmd_proc.t 4 1024
Eeek. Yes, I forgot just how crazy a language it was. :-D
> Yes, that's the plan, but the initial implementation isn't going to
> be a compiler like most people would expect:
>
> For example, something like:
>
> while {$a < 10} { incr a }
>
> while isn't language syntax. it's a command. So, this c
Yes, that's the plan, but the initial implementation isn't going to
be a compiler like most people would expect:
For example, something like:
while {$a < 10} { incr a }
while isn't language syntax. it's a command. So, this code would
result in creating two PMCs for the args (first arg is {$
Very cool. Will have to look into it soon.
Are you still contemplating making the whole thing compiled?
> Tcl's [expr] command now compiles expressions to PIR (before, it would
create an AST that it would then interpret when you wanted the value.).
Note: the language itself is still interpreted, t
11 matches
Mail list logo
