Book Image

Build Your Own Programming Language

By : Clinton L. Jeffery
Book Image

Build Your Own Programming Language

By: Clinton L. Jeffery

Overview of this book

The need for different types of computer languages is growing rapidly and developers prefer creating domain-specific languages for solving specific application domain problems. Building your own programming language has its advantages. It can be your antidote to the ever-increasing size and complexity of software. In this book, you’ll start with implementing the frontend of a compiler for your language, including a lexical analyzer and parser. The book covers a series of traversals of syntax trees, culminating with code generation for a bytecode virtual machine. Moving ahead, you’ll learn how domain-specific language features are often best represented by operators and functions that are built into the language, rather than library functions. We’ll conclude with how to implement garbage collection, including reference counting and mark-and-sweep garbage collection. Throughout the book, Dr. Jeffery weaves in his experience of building the Unicon programming language to give better context to the concepts where relevant examples are provided in both Unicon and Java so that you can follow the code of your choice of either a very high-level language with advanced features, or a mainstream language. By the end of this book, you’ll be able to build and deploy your own domain-specific languages, capable of compiling and running programs.
Table of Contents (25 chapters)
1
Section 1: Programming Language Frontends
7
Section 2: Syntax Tree Traversals
13
Section 3: Code Generation and Runtime Systems
21
Section 4: Appendix

Questions

  1. A bytecode interpreter could use an instruction set with up to three addresses (operands) per instruction, such as three-address code. Instead, the Jzero interpreter uses zero or one operands per instruction. What are the pros and cons of using three-address code in the bytecode interpreter, such as in intermediate code?
  2. On real CPUs and in many C-based bytecode interpreters, bytecode addresses are represented by literal machine addresses. However, the bytecode interpreters that were shown in this chapter implement bytecode addresses as positions or offsets within allocated blocks of memory. Is a programming language that does not have a pointer data type at a fatal disadvantage in implementing a bytecode interpreter, compared to a language that does support pointer data types?
  3. If code is represented in memory as an immutable string value, what constraints does that impose on the implementation of a bytecode interpreter?