Take a look at the Squeak bootstrap process paper, which generated a "small
everything", including tools and the ability to self bootstrap to other
platforms.
http://www.vpri.org/pdf/tr1997001_backto.pdf
A few of us (at Apple at the time) did the original bootstrap (from an old
Smalltalk that Apple owned) to the Mac. Andreas Raab (then in Germany) did the
quick port to MS, and Ian Piumarta (then in France) did the quick port to Linux.
A nice feature of Smalltalk (which has been rarely used outside of a small
group) is a collection of tools that can be used to create an entirely
different language within it and then launch it without further needing
Smalltalk. This was used 3 or 4 times at PARC to do radically different designs
and implementations for the progression of Smalltalks ....
Cheers,
Alan
>________________________________
> From: Florin Mateoc <[email protected]>
>To: Fundamentals of New Computing <[email protected]>
>Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 7:20 AM
>Subject: Re: [fonc] Kernel & Maru
>
>
>Yes, these threads are little gems by themselves, thank you!
>
>
>I hope I am not straying too much from the main topic when asking about what I
>think is a related problem: a great help for playing with languages are the
>tools. Since we are talking about bootstrapping everything, we would ideally
>also be able to generate the tools together with all the rest. This is a
>somewhat different kind of language bootstrap, where actions and predicates in
>the language grammar have their own grammar, so they don't need to rely on any
>host language, but still allow one to flexibly generate a lot of boilerplate
>code, including for example classes (or other language specific structures)
>representing the AST nodes, including visiting code, formatters, code
>comparison tools, even abstract(ideally with a flexible level of
>abstraction)evaluation code over those AST nodes, and debuggers. This
>obviously goes beyond language syntax, one needs an execution model as well
>(perhaps in combination with a worlds-like approach). I am still not
sure how far one can go, what can be succinctly specified and how.
>
>
>
>I would greatly appreciate any pointers in this direction
>
>
>Florin
>
>
>
>
>________________________________
> From: Monty Zukowski <[email protected]>
>To: Fundamentals of New Computing <[email protected]>
>Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 12:20 AM
>Subject: Re: [fonc] Kernel & Maru
>
>Thank you everyone for the great references. I've got some homework
>to do now...
>
>Monty
>
>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Ian Piumarta <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Extending Alan's comments...
>>
>> A small, well explained, and easily understandable example of an iterative
>> implementation of a recursive language (Scheme) can be found in R. Kent
>> Dybvig's Ph.D. thesis.
>>
>> http://www.cs.unm.edu/~williams/cs491/three-imp.pdf
>>
>> Regards,
>> Ian
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> fonc mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
>_______________________________________________
>fonc mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>fonc mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
fonc mailing list
[email protected]
http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
