hi Guys I am working on this problem as my masters research project. Details to follow soon
On Saturday 20 March 2004 16:33, Gerald E Butler wrote: > Hello all, > > I've been investigating the possibility of creating a MACHINE > DESCRIPTION (aka BACK-END) for GCC to target PARROT. My thinking is > this: If a satisfactory GCC back-end targeting PARROT is created -and- > PARROT is efficient enough (which from reading the documentation thus > far produced seems like it is an inevitable conclusion) then GCC could > compile itself to PARROT byte-code giving PARROT (and the whole open > source community) a PARROT self-host compiler which compiles multiple > languages (C#, C++, C, Pascal, Objective-C, Java, etc, etc, etc) to the > PARROT runtime. > > Is a complete non-starter, or is this something which has > possibilities? Please give your expert opinions. > > On Sat, 2004-03-20 at 11:18, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > At 12:44 PM -0800 3/19/04, Larry Wall wrote: > > >On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 08:57:28AM +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote: > > >: What's the usage of Continuations from HLLs point of view? Can we get > > >: some hints, what is intended? > > > > > >From the standpoint of Perl 6, I hope to hide continuations far, far > > >away in a galaxy long ago. No wait, wrong movie... > > > > Which is swell, but Perl 6 is only one of the languages we care > > about. Ruby does, and while it's not exactly one of the primary > > targets, scheme and lisp are heavily laced with them. > > > > >We can certainly make it the default that a routine is not going to > > >do anything fancy with continuations unless it is explicitly declared > > >to allow it. > > > > Can't do that. There's no way you can ever really know that, since > > any function or method you call might take one. Forbidding it is > > going to be problematic as well, since then we hit performance issues > > in guaranteeing that. -- Vishal Vatsa Dept. of Computer Sc. NUI Maynooth
