Front page | perl.perl6.compiler |
Postings from September 2004
Re: Current state?
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next
From:
JOSEPH RYAN
Date:
September 8, 2004 11:47
Subject:
Re: Current state?
Message ID:
2e923e2ec5e6.2ec5e62e923e@osu.edu
----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick R. Michaud" <pmichaud@pobox.com>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2004 1:21 pm
Subject: Re: Current state?
> On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 09:56:12AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 07:33:45AM -0600, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> > : We're in the beginning stages of building a basic perl 6
> grammar engine
> > : (i.e., probably without p6 closures) that compiles to parrot
> and handles
> > : basic optimizations.
> >
> > I wonder whether, in the absence of closures, we'll have to have
> some> similar way to embed syntax-tree building code (PIR?) as
> actions in
> > the grammar.
>
> We may indeed need this. I think the easiest way would be to
> build some sort of "special-purpose" assertions or rules that
> fire off some PIR code.
That's probably the best solution for now.
> Or, perhaps we can just find a way to do a funky sort of replacement
> whereby p6 source code gets replaced by its equivalent PIR code as
> soon as the compiler think it has a rule matched. Naaah, scratch
> that.
We tried that as an optimization in the prototype
Perl6 compiler. It ended up being a really really
really bad idea because the grammar backtracked like
a madman. It might be workable if we can infuse
<commit>'s in every location possible...
- Joe
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next