On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goub...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Phil,
>
> thanks for the update on Slang to C. Allways significant to have that.
>
> Two open questions:
>
> - would a slang to x86 asm via NativeBoost be doable / a nice target?
>

I have to admit that I am happy to have Slang to C and it gets out of my
competence from there :-)

Now, Slang to asm, that's quite a chasm to cross. If what asm does is doing
syscalls, well, I don't see the added value right away as NB Assembler
would do that already no?

Now, I am on Linux for about all of my Pharo code, so, C is nice enough.


>
> - would targetting LLVM-IR be of interest?
>

Oh, that would be interesting. In order to get the IR interpreter and
running things all over. Now, this should be extended to the whole VM then.
But not sure we want that before we get 64 bits...

Ah, I should have taken the research career :-)

Phil


>
> Thierry
>
> 2014-09-15 12:29 GMT+02:00 p...@highoctane.be <p...@highoctane.be>:
>
>> Slang has been externalized by Pavel. So, Smalltalk to C works.
>>
>> Works nicely, even if there were a few glitches (like code generated
>> twice at one point).
>> Nothing unfixable, I got the beast working.
>>
>> Allows for things like: write Slang, generate C, compile into DLL, load
>> DLL, run C code. All in a single shot.
>>
>> PavelKrivanek/CCodeGenerator on SmalltalkHub (which looks like super
>> slow/zombified).
>>
>> Phil
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Santiago Bragagnolo <
>> santiagobragagn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>  I may be wrong, but I think the closest thing out there is Slang. Is
>>> the pseudo smalltalk used to develop the VM.
>>>
>>> Also there is a project for generating C for arduino, (a project related
>>> with EToys), but i am not sure about how complete is.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2014-09-15 11:04 GMT+02:00 kilon alios <kilon.al...@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> Is there a way to convert code from pharo to c or c++ ? Does pettit
>>>> parser or other parsers offer such support ?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to