Thanks Jan for the advice, I will definitely go ahead and start on
that trail.

I too appreciate the thinness of books, and also when they get strait
to the point and skip the bloating that can occur in many text
books...

On Jan 8, 8:41 pm, "Jan Goyvaerts" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:48 PM, Kram <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Well I guess thats really the million dollar question, "what am I
> > looking to learn out of all this?". I guess Im sort of a bit lost when
> > it comes to even that question, perhaps you could help me out there.
>
> > What I really constantly finding myself interested in is languages as
> > a whole, not just the bytecode, or the compilation, but rather the
> > entire language platform itself. It interests me to know just how
> > people go about writing the languages that developers all over the
> > world use.
>
> Have a try with Antlr-like stuff then - The book I mentioned is well
> written, has a kind of theoretical language approach of the thing and last
> but not least: it's a thin book. Something I particularly appreciate about
> books. :-)
>
> If you managed to read the book without getting bored, I guess grammars of
> programming languages is what you like.
>
> If I'm not mistaken the Eclipse plugin of Antlr is quite nice also.
>
> > The most interesting Java Posse podcast that I have heard so far,
> > (starting from around mid-late 2007) was the JVM lanugages summit
> > episode where they talked a lot about different bytecode proposals,
> > tail recursion, etc... so that gives me some indication that languages
> > are where I want to focus some of my learning at this point in my
> > life. So I said to myself that I want to write my own language on the
> > JVM. But had no idea where to start, and hence this discussion... :)
>
> > Mark, thanks for the link, Ill be sure to give that a read, looks like
> > a very comprehensive article.
>
> > On Jan 8, 3:32 am, Jan Goyvaerts <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Well, it all depends of what you want to learn about of course: the
> > > JVM bytecode or the creation of a DSL. In the former case it might be
> > > a bit of an overkill to start learning about language parser
> > > frameworks. If you keep your syntax simple and straightforward you can
> > > quickly write your own basic parser and concentrate on the bytecode
> > > generation.
>
> > > On Jan 7, 12:25 pm, Kram <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Thanks all very much, strangely, I was for some reason expecting a
> > > > whole heap of posts from people saying things like:
>
> > > > "You must create your own c++ compiler that does A, B and C" (is javac
> > > > written in c++?)
>
> > > > But I guess not... thanks for the links so far! I really appreciate
> > > > the help.
>
> > > > Mark
>
> > > > On Jan 7, 8:08 pm, "Jan Goyvaerts" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > Personally I don't know about Rats - but I would also advise to go
> > for the
> > > > > language parser approach. A structured approach towards implementing
> > a DSL.
> > > > > I certainly recommend the Antlr book of Pragmatic Programmers (
> >http://www.pragprog.com/titles/tpantlr/the-definitive-antlr-reference).
>
> > > > > You could be the first to create a DSL with a feature we all use but
> > is
> > > > > provided by no language so far: Say "Hello World". ;-)
>
> > > > > On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Reinier Zwitserloot <
> > [email protected]>wrote:
>
> > > > > > Personally i advise using rats instead of ANTLR, but, ymmv.
>
> > > > > > On Jan 7, 3:16 am, RogerV <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > I've been using ANTLR for my "little" language, SFig:
>
> > > > > > >http://code.google.com/p/sfig/
>
> > > > > > > I've used flex/bison (GUN lex and yacc clones) in the past to
> > roll a
> > > > > > > XSLT parser and have very much liked working with ANTLR as a
> > contrast.
>
> > > > > > > ANTLR by default is geared toward creating language parsers that
> > > > > > > target the Java JVM, however, it can also target C/C++, C# .NET,
> > > > > > > ActionScript3. (This turns out to be quite advantageous to my
> > > > > > > particular language project.)
>
> > > > > > > I like that lexical definitions are rolled into the same source
> > file
> > > > > > > as the grammar.
>
> > > > > > > I like the ANTLR concept of optionally being able to devise a
> > tree
> > > > > > > grammar to process AST. I structured SFig in this manner.
>
> > > > > > > The first pass creates tree structure AST, and then a second pass
> > can
> > > > > > > be made over the AST to do actions. In ANTLR you actually encode
> > a
> > > > > > > tree grammar that looks very similar to the language grammar.
>
> > > > > > > For ultra simple languages with very minimalist purposes, doing a
> > tree
> > > > > > > grammar might be overkill, but it's a handy way to structure
> > things
> > > > > > > when you get to have a bit more complexity going on.
>
> > > > > > > Also, if you buy the ANTLR book, it has a section on doing byte
> > code
> > > > > > > enhancement, which is way to get introduced to messing with Java
> > byte
> > > > > > > code.
>
> > > > > > > Messing with ANTLR is bound to give inspiration for doing some
> > > > > > > actually practical language tools - in addition to being a good
> > > > > > > environment to learn language parsing with.
>
> > > > > > > --Roger
>
> > > > > > > On Jan 6, 3:43 am, Kram <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > For a while now, I've been wanting to get my hands dirty on
> > Java and
> > > > > > > > the JVM, by this is mean getting to know bytecode, and how
> > compilers
> > > > > > > > work, JIT, the JVM in general, etc...
>
> > > > > > > > So the best thing I figure to do is to write my own, very
> > basic,
> > > > > > > > language for the JVM. Even if it provides no real benefit to
> > anyone, I
> > > > > > > > would really like to give this a try.
>
> > > > > > > > Languages really interest me and any help on this topic would
> > be
> > > > > > > > greatly appreciated.
>
> > > > > > > > Thanks a lot,
> > > > > > > > Mark
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The 
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to