Sven Barth <pascaldra...@googlemail.com> wrote the following on 08/02/12 14:24:17: > Am 08.02.2012 15:16, schrieb rvmart...@ntlworld.com: > > Hans-Peter Diettrich<drdiettri...@aol.com> wrote the following on 08/02/12 > > 11:28:49: > >> Mark Morgan Lloyd schrieb: > >>> Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote: > >>>> steve smithers schrieb: > >>>> > >>>>> Regardless of what you may believe, FreePascal is not the first > >>>>> compiler to be > >>>>> implemented on 370 architecture. > >>>> > >>>> I.e. you can study how they create code, before you reinvent the wheel > >>>> :-) > >>> > >>> :-) Had occurred to me as well, although obviously a lot is dictated by > >>> FPC's higher-level parsing and structure. > >> > >> This should not be a problem. It's up to the code generator to define > >> its own strategies for allocating space for code and data items, and how > >> to address them in generated code. The parse tree tells the back-end > >> *what* should be done, the back-end then has to know *how* to do it. > >> > >>> Might still be very useful for > >>> getting calling conventions etc. right. > >> > >> The implementation of calling conventions is up to the code generator as > >> well. You can invent your own conventions, and map them to any > >> predefined one. As a starting point it's sufficient to support only one > >> calling convention, the one for system calls. More conventions for > >> calling other external libraries may be required, depending on the > >> target OS conventions. > > > > Where can I find details of the input to the back-end? > > I'd like to have a crack at generating assembler code for VM/SP. > > Best (and AFAIK only) available source: the compiler's source code. Sorry.
Ouch!! OK, thanks. Bob _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
