Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED.news.iecc.com!nerds-end From: anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) Newsgroups: comp.compilers Subject: Re: Are there "compiler generators"? Date: Mon, 30 May 2022 07:35:16 GMT Organization: Institut fuer Computersprachen, Technische Universitaet Wien Lines: 22 Sender: news@iecc.com Approved: comp.compilers@iecc.com Message-ID: <22-05-062@comp.compilers> References: <22-05-054@comp.compilers> <22-05-059@comp.compilers> Injection-Info: gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="71575"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com" Keywords: tools, theory Posted-Date: 30 May 2022 14:48:11 EDT X-submission-address: compilers@iecc.com X-moderator-address: compilers-request@iecc.com X-FAQ-and-archives: http://compilers.iecc.com Xref: csiph.com comp.compilers:3034 Martin Ward writes: >In practice, there is a lot more to writing a compiler than just >partially evaluating an interpreter. In the 1990s I heard several talks about compiler generation in that way, and it was an old topic by then, with still no practical results, so my impression was that it never was going to be practical. But recently I heard great things about optimizing Truffle interpreters which eventually results in a compiler for the interpreted language. You probably still have to hold it right, but it's certainly much better than what I expected. I asked one of the people involved if there had been a breakthrough, but he could not name one, and said that there were just a lot of little problems to be solved. - anton -- M. Anton Ertl anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/