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

Chapter 14

  1. Although libraries are great, they have downsides. Libraries tend to have more version compatibility problems than the features that are built into the language. Libraries are unable to provide a notation that is concise and readable as built-ins. Lastly, libraries do not lend themselves to interactions with novel control structures to support new application domains.
  2. If your new computation only needs one or two parameters, appears many times in typical applications in your domain, and computes a new value without side effects, it is a good candidate to be made into an operator. An operator is limited to two operands, or at the most, three; otherwise, it will not provide any readability advantage over a function.
  3. Ultimately, we have to read the books written by the Java language inventors to hear their reasons, but one answer might be that Java designers wanted to use strings as a class and decided classes would not be free to implement operators for the sake...