> One big thing is that if you write your compiler in something that isn't > running on top of Parrot, you're going to have a lot harder time doing > eval-style things, where you need to call back into the compiler at runtime. > That's trivial if you're using the PCT toolchain. > > Note that while you'll no doubt write a little PIR here and there, to do > some of the low-level stuff, it's not so much. Even in Rakudo, which has > plenty of evil stuff to do, if you discount the builtin functions and > classes that are currently written in PIR
That makes a lot of sense. Seems like I was completely misunderstanding the reason for those design decisions. I play with extensive checks and static analysis at compile-time, and probably not belong to Parrot's target group at all )) Regards, Pavlo _______________________________________________ http://lists.parrot.org/mailman/listinfo/parrot-dev
