David Whitten (whitten@netcom.com) wrote:
> I talked to someone who told me that Pop has syntax extension capabilities.
> I am interested in adding a language (MUMPS) to the languages suported in
> a POPLOG system. From what I know of Pop, Prolog, and ML, it looks like
> most of the system level support I would expect to successfully implement
> a MUMPS system is already provided in a typical Poplog implementation.
Yes, I think it would be quite feasible. My experience in writing
compilers inside Poplog has been that the hardest problem is designing
the namespace support mechanism -- because Poplog does not provide
any means of creating a new empty namespace (i.e. you cannot create
new top-level sections.)
To find out more you really need to read REF VMCODE, REF KEYS, and
REF SUBSYSTEM. (If you don't have a copy then mail julianc@integ.co.uk)
The main problem in learning how to write compilers in Poplog is the
lack of simple examples.
Steve
|