Front page | perl.bootstrap |
Postings from July 2000
I think that is an excellent idea. The more things we can separate the better imo. We could also do the Python thing of % perl foo.pl - check for foo.plc [compiled perl] and run that through the interp - check for foo.plo [object code] and link in - compile the pl -> plc and then run through the interp Dion > -----Original Message----- > From: John Porter [mailto:jdporter@min.net] > Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 1:14 PM > To: bootstrap@perl.org > Subject: Re: implementation strategy (was Re: Working Group Proposal) > > > Brock wrote: > > > > This parser would output a Parse Tree, which could then be traversed. > > Traversal could be done either in perl, or in the proposed > meta-language, > > though I'd prefer a perl solution. > > I think Brock makes a good point: the compiler and interpreter could be > cleanly separated; of course, they both need to be new in the perl6 > project; but the interpreter, for example, could be functionally > equivalent to the one in the current perl5. The (new) compiler could > be made perl5-compatible at first, and changed (since it will now be > easy to change) as perl6 is developed. Or we could just leave it at > that and declare victory. :-) > > -- > John Porter > > Aus tiefem Traum bin ich erwacht. > >Thread Previous | Thread Next