spykyvenator

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

Seems like the better place to post this idd

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Yes, indeed, I had a hard time explaining this but its what I mean.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I think you nailed this.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (4 children)

I don't think that, but it could be. Variables, functions and things like loops, switches and if statements are things that many programming languages have in common. They can be specified without forcing a specific syntax and already take you far from turing machines.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (7 children)

I agree, I put an example in my main post, it isn't really a language in that it has as little as possible language specifications. It could be simple or complex syntax based on what plugins you select for your use case. Its not a universal programming language more like a universal programming language specification that most languages fit into.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

LLVM really looks like something that I need to look into

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It is somewhat like running multiple linters and prettifiers but these are hefty tools, the build tool should provide an interface that lets you attach different programs for every little step from code to machine lang

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (9 children)

LLVM Is something I want to check out for some time now but never did. yacc I haven't heard about. but its indeed what I'm getting at, why haven't we got a single language that you can adapt to all needs.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

Yes, they are there to combine several programs into the building process, and could be used for this. What I would want is programs like typescript that preprocess your code with possible changes in syntax and language specification

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I'm not trying to target gcc specifically but compilers in general. I just know gcc best which is why its in my examples.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (8 children)

Yes, not sure what you mean by this but its indeed what I'm getting at, our compilers aren't built enough in unix fashion to my liking. gcc handles preprocessing, compilation and linking. but I wouldn't know how to run a second preprocessor after the first one in gcc, just did a quick search apparently gcc -E handles this, but that doesn't seem that intuitive to run gcc -E on all files to some temporary directory, there run some other program on all the code then compile and link. A pipeline would be nicer and I also don't know any tools that can do additional preprocessing.

25
Does this language exist? (programming.dev)
submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

Being a foss enthusiast I can configure most of my software in way too many ways. However I noticed that this is not true for most compilers. Which got me thinking: why isn't that the case. In gcc (or your favorite compiler tool) I have a shitload of options about what are errors and warnings and how the code should be compiled and tons of other options. But not on how the code should be interpreted and what the code should look like.

Why can't I simply add a module to a build process to make it [objective oriented | have indentation for brackets | automatically allocate memory | automatically assume types | auto forward-declarate | some other thing that differentiates one language from another]* ? Its so weird that I have a pdf reader that has an option to set the window icon, a mail client that lets me specify regex to search for a mentioned but forgotten attachment and play a game that lets me set my texture picmip resolution. But that the tool (gcc) to build these things has not even got a config file build in. We have build tools around them to supply arguments.

This could look like the following: ( oversimplified )

  1. preprocess
  2. compile
  3. assemble
  4. link

v

  1. add brackets from indentation
  2. preprocess
  3. check if objective oriented constraints are all satisfied
  4. do something else
  5. compile
  6. assemble
  7. run assembly through as an example ai for antivirus scanning
  8. link
  9. run test

There could also be a fork in this process: sending for example the source code both to a compiler and an interpreter to detect edge case behavior while compiling. Or compile with both automatic typing and your defined typing so that when rounding errors are big you can instantly compare with a dynamically typed version of your program. Or the other way around, maybe you want different parts of your code to be handled with different preprocessors.

The build process should be configured per project for things about the input like syntax and per computer for things about the output like optimizations.

There are of course some drawbacks, one being a trust issue where someone pulls in a obscure module to build malicious releases. It probably also is harder to maintain stability when you have to keep in mind that your preprocessor isn't the first to be run. And your compiling process can take a lot longer if you have to go through multiple pre, post or even compilation phases.

If you know such a build tool, or c (: haha :) some obvious reasons that this should not exist, please let me know. Thank you for reading this lenghty post.

Thanks for the comments, based on them I think I can better explain what I want. I would like a language that has got minimal specification so its preprocessor, compiler, assembler and linker are a collection of plugins rather than one chunky program.

So the compiler reads for example a line. void main(int argc, char argv) and then all main body plugins get a event_newline. The function plugin reads this and creates a new object that contains the function main. Then sets an event_functionBody that is caught by other plugin(s) to read the contents of main and return what it has to do.

view more: next ›