Hi, I am working on a project to convert a proprietary DSL language into standard one. The proprietary language is executed by interpreter engine from intermedia representation. The challenge is maintaining the language and the runtime.
I am exploring an option to use compile-on-the-fly approach by translating the DSL to c, compile/execute in memory. Language is Fortran/c style, and is “safe” (no pointers, atomic strings, and bound-checked arrays) - most statements can be converted to c. One challenge is methods. Language allow simple OO calls obj->method. The challenge is how to tell obj->prop (value), vs obj->method (function call). The translator can do it, if it will build parse tree, symbol tables. This is much more work than a statement by statement translator. I was hoping it will be possible to make a small change to tcc, introduce a new operator (e.g. obj@func), which will be equivalent to obj->method() (function call) or obj->prop (member value), based on the type of the member (function pointers). Can anyone comment on readability of making such a change to tcc ? Thanks, yair Sent from my iPad _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
