Hi,
After writing a simple interpreter for my simplified C language using
bison, I'm currently planning to write a small and a really simple
compiler for it using flex and bison as a front-end. My problem right
now is that I'm not pretty sure if I have to implement an intermediary
representation for a given source script, or not. Actually, I'd like to
do it but then I remember the mission/goal of bison, i.e does pattern
matching and then executes an action if a rule matches, and by
implementing an IR tree to walk through it later, it feels like I'm
redoing bison's job... I could just place the code emitters right in the
actions associated with the grammar rules and that's it. I still don't
know what to do...
Here is ideally what I want to construct given this little piece of code:
int a, b, c;
a = 5;
b = 10;
c = a + b;
then bison would construct these trees for me:
ASSIGN --- ASSIGN --- ASSIGN
/ \ / \ / \
ID CONST ID CONST ID BINARY (+)
/ \
ID ID
And then, I would just traverse these trees (top to bottom, left to
right) to emit bind the identifiers to registers and to emit the native
opcodes. But I can also do these actions directly in the semantic rules
without trees construction..
Guys, any suggestions? I'm confused.
Best regards,
Ilyes Gouta.
_______________________________________________
help-bison@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-bison
