On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 12:48, Michal Wallace wrote:
It does seem like there are some snags getting
languages to talk to each other, even with the
calling conventions, but even so, I'm even more
convinced now that a generic, overridable
code-generator is the way to go.
It seems to me that if we
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Stephen Thorne wrote:
It seems to me that if we want to maximize the
number of languages using it, the generic
compiler shouldn't depend on anything but
C and parrot... But until we get it working,
I'd like to stick to a dynamic language like
Michal Wallace wrote:
On Sun, 3 Aug 2003, K Stol wrote:
What do you think? Want to try squishing pirate/python
and pirate/lua together? :)
Yeah, I like the idea. Let's try this out.
Well, I finished reading your report[1] and
posted some of my (rather unorganized) thoughts
up
- Original Message -
From: Joseph Ryan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Michal Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: K Stol [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 12:24 AM
Subject: Re: generic code generator? [was: subroutines and python status]
Michal Wallace wrote:
On Sun
At 11:09 PM -0400 8/4/03, Michal Wallace wrote:
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Stephen Thorne wrote:
Thus the code generator is best suited to be in a language that can
be run from within the parrot machine, otherwise statements like
'eval()' would not be possible without binding parrot to a
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Dan Sugalski wrote:
The original thought was to use the new perl 6 grammar engine/code
to do this, but I think it'll be a while before that's ready to go.
I think perl6 is definitely the way to go, once it's ready.
BTW, what's the deal with Bundle::Perl6? I tried
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Joseph Ryan wrote:
Okay, I don't have a good syntax in mind yet,
the point is it's a template language and you
can subclass/override/extend the template.
Maybe there's no syntax and it just uses
cleanly coded classes in some oo language.
Or perl6 with it's grammars and
At 1:35 PM -0400 8/5/03, Michal Wallace wrote:
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Joseph Ryan wrote:
Okay, I don't have a good syntax in mind yet,
the point is it's a template language and you
can subclass/override/extend the template.
Maybe there's no syntax and it just uses
cleanly coded classes in some
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, Dan Sugalski wrote:
haskell_parser - ast - pirate - parrot_code -- imcc - pbc
^
|
parrot_code__templates
So the haskell
On Sun, 3 Aug 2003, K Stol wrote:
What do you think? Want to try squishing pirate/python
and pirate/lua together? :)
Yeah, I like the idea. Let's try this out.
Well, I finished reading your report[1] and
posted some of my (rather unorganized) thoughts
up at [2]
It does seem like there
On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, K Stol wrote:
From: Leon Brocard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
I don't like things becoming dead-ends. How much work do you think
it'd be to extend it some more and update it to latest Lua?
...
2: I misdesigned the code generator; that is, at the point where I
couldn't start
- Original Message -
From: Michal Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: K Stol [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2003 2:25 AM
Subject: generic code generator? [was: subroutines and python status]
On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, K Stol wrote:
From: Leon Brocard [EMAIL
On Sun, 3 Aug 2003, K Stol wrote:
At this moment, I'm looking at a new version of Lua, the previous
'pirate' compiled (well, sort of :-) Lua 4 Lua 5 has some features,
such as coroutines (If I remembered well) and all kinds of neat
stuff for which Parrot has built-in support (and it dropped
On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 19:25, Michal Wallace wrote:
On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, K Stol wrote:
Really, there's a ton of overlap between the various
high level languages that parrot wants to support.
Maybe we could put together a generic code generator
that everyone could use? Obviously, it would have to
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You mind submitting a patch to put this in the languages/pirate
I'd appreciate that very much. Pie-thon, here we come ...
Speaking of adding new projects to languages, I have a partially complete
JVM-PIR translator done. It's
- Original Message -
From: Melvin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 3:33 PM
Subject: Re: subroutines and python status
At 01:51 PM 7/31/2003 -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
You mind submitting
K Stol sent the following bits through the ether:
Actually, I named my little project pirate (s.
http://members.home.nl/joeijoei/parrot for this) already, but it's a bit of
a dead end already (although I learnt much of it), so I don't mind.
Quick, we need more parrot jokes...
I don't like
- Original Message -
From: Leon Brocard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 1:30 AM
Subject: Re: subroutines and python status
K Stol sent the following bits through the ether:
Actually, I named my little project pirate (s.
http://members.home.nl
At 11:04 PM +0200 7/31/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You mind submitting a patch to put this in the languages/pirate
I'd appreciate that very much. Pie-thon, here we come ...
As would I. If you're willing, Michal, we can check it in and get you
CVS repository
On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 11:04 PM +0200 7/31/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You mind submitting a patch to put this in the languages/pirate
I'd appreciate that very much. Pie-thon, here we come ...
As would I. If you're willing, Michal,
Hey all,
I'm trying to get functions working
in python, and I'm not sure the best way
to do this.
What seems natural to me is to define
subroutines in the middle of the code
as I walk the parse tree:
.sub __main__
goto endsub
.sub _f
print :(\n
ret
.end
endsub:
Michal Wallace:
I can store all my subroutine definitions in
a list or something and then dump them out
after the __main__ routine. Is that the
right approach? It seems strange to me,
but I'm new at this.
That seems to be the way to do it, speaking as someone who's working on a
Perl 5-to-PIL
Michal Wallace wrote:
Hey all,
What seems natural to me is to define
subroutines in the middle of the code
as I walk the parse tree:
You can do that:
.sub __main__
bsr _main
end
.end
.sub _main
.sub _f
print :)\n
ret
.end
.sub _g
print ;-)\n
ret
Michal Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
.sub __start__
call __main__
.end
.sub __main__
.sub _f
print :)
ret
.end
$I0 = addr _f
print $I0
end
.end
That prints :), followed by the address,
No, can't imagine that:
$ parrot -o- pirate.imc
__start__:
Hey all,
I'm trying to get functions working
in python, and I'm not sure the best way
to do this.
What seems natural to me is to define
subroutines in the middle of the code
as I walk the parse tree:
.sub __main__
goto endsub
.sub _f
print :(\n
ret
On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
You can do that:
.sub __main__
bsr _main
end
.end
.sub _main
...
So you have just to emit code, to call your real main at the beginning.
Well that worked, and even let me get rid of the
endsub label:
.sub __start__
call __main__
On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Brent Royal-Gordon wrote:
Michal Wallace:
I can store all my subroutine definitions in
a list or something and then dump them out
after the __main__ routine.
That seems to be the way to do it, speaking as someone who's working
on a Perl 5-to-PIL converter (using the
On 31 Jul 2003, Luke Palmer wrote:
It now runs amk's euclid.py perfectly now.
Do we have a way to compare the speed vs python? :)
We just modify it to repeat 100,000 times or so, and compare that way.
Oh, duh. :)
Which I did. Parrot comes in about 3x slower than python on euclid.
From
One of my questions is, why do you make so many PerlNums when there
isn't a trace of a floating point number to be found...?
Because I didn't read the docs that said PerlNum means float. :)
I'll switch it to PerlInt (or maybe int?) later...
Yeah, all your auxillary data; i.e. the flags
Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You mind submitting a patch to put this in the languages/pirate
I'd appreciate that very much. Pie-thon, here we come ...
Luke
leo
At 02:54 PM 7/31/2003 -0400, Michal Wallace wrote:
Actually, between imcc and the python compiler
module, it's not nearly as hard as I thought it
would be. So far, I think the parrot version is
actually a lot simpler than the python compiler,
just because imcc is doing so much of the work.
Leo and
At 01:51 PM 7/31/2003 -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
You mind submitting a patch to put this in the languages/pirate
directory of the parrot distro? I'd like to stay up to date, and
probably do some work (as, I imagine, would others).
I'd like to officially complain that pirate is a cooler name than
32 matches
Mail list logo
