Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!news-out.readnews.com!news-xxxfer.readnews.com!news.misty.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED!nerds-end From: "James Harris" Newsgroups: comp.compilers Subject: Re: Best tools for writing an assembler? Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 23:18:01 -0000 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 20 Sender: news@iecc.com Approved: comp.compilers@iecc.com Message-ID: <14-02-037@comp.compilers> References: <14-02-018@comp.compilers> <14-02-021@comp.compilers> <14-02-023@comp.compilers> <14-02-030@comp.compilers> NNTP-Posting-Host: news.iecc.com X-Trace: miucha.iecc.com 1393298218 42470 64.57.183.58 (25 Feb 2014 03:16:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@iecc.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 03:16:58 +0000 (UTC) Keywords: assembler Posted-Date: 24 Feb 2014 22:16:58 EST 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:1116 "noitalmost" wrote in message > I wouldn't bother with any generation tools like flex or bison, unless > you want to gain experience with those tools for some other project. IMO this is very valid. My own experience was that writing a compiler by hand (albeit using a language with inbuilt RE handling) was much easier than using some of the popular tools. And the hand-written nature of the parser helped produce good error messages. It wouldn't have worked without some basic rules being established and for sure they were hard to decide on. But once in place the rest of it was easier. If it's of help to the OP I wrote it up in a fairly long post at https://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.lang.misc/ZsdLITOXL-w/discussion It was for a compiler but the points should apply well to an assembler too. James