Kuba Ober wrote: > Um, since Ocaml can be compiled to bytecode and said bytecode executed > by an interpreter written in C, that's sorta-kinda el-cheapo conversion > right there. One can work backwards.
I'm pretty sure the original poster's intent was to convert the MTASC compiler to C, C++ or PHP and then continue developement in the new language. Unfortunately, the machine conversion from languages as different as Ocaml and the imperative laguages above result ins source code that may compile in the target language, but is almost completely unreadable by human programmers familiar with the target language. Doing the conversion via bytecode would result in even less readable code than the more direct route for the same reasons that we don't have usable binary to high level language decompilers. > Side note: is there an Ocaml bytecode-compiler written in Ocaml > somewhere? I'm pretty sure the vast majority of the standard Ocaml bytecode compiler is written in Ocaml. The same is probably not true for the bytecode VM. Erik -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Erik de Castro Lopo ----------------------------------------------------------------- Pastafarianism : http://www.venganza.org/ The intelligent alternative to 'Intelligent Design'. _______________________________________________ Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management: http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
