On Mon, 15 Apr 2002, Jerome Quelin wrote:
> * Befunge does not support named subroutines. So I have to provide a way in
> order to simulate this. I thought about the following:
>
> use Inline Befunge;
> print "9 + 16 = ", add(9, 16), "\n";
> print "9 - 16 = ", subtract(9, 16), "\n";
> __END__
> __Befunge__
> BF add
> +q
> BF substract
> -q
>
> This means I'm parsing (via the Inline::Befugne::build() sub) the Befunge
> space and split on the pattern /BF (.+)/,
Sounds good.
> creating a hash ref:
> { add => '+q',
> substract => '-q' }
> that I'm storing in the Inline object in the ILSM section.
Now you've lost me. Don't create hash-refs, create subroutines in the
package that wants to Inline Befunge. If that didn't make any sense feel
free to take a look at my Inline::Guile module. In load(), I loop over
functions and bind them into the calling package like this:
# got a live one, register it
no strict 'refs';
*{"${pkg}::$name"} = sub { Guile::apply($proc, [@_]); }
Replace that Guile::apply() with the appropriate Language::Befunge call
and you should be in business.
> * Another question. Let's assume the calling part work. Since Befunge is
> stack based, I have to push the params onto the stack. Furthermore, since it
> only understands integers, I have to translate strings into "0gnirts" (that
> is, a zero terminated serie of integers mapping the ordinal values of the
> chars). So, how can I fetch the args provided to the sub?
Er, using @_? In the example above I pass args to my Guile functions as a
ref to to contents of @_. You could replace that with a call to a routine
that turns the contents of @_ into integers and pushes them onto the
stack.
-sam
