Search Results

Search found 78 results on 4 pages for 'interpreters'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 1/4 | 1 2 3 4  | Next Page >

  • State machine interpreters

    - by saadtaame
    I wrote my own state machine tool in C and at this point I'm faced with two choices for specifying state machines. Crafting a little language and writing a interpreter. Writing a compiler for that language. I know the advantages/disadvantages of each. I'd like to know what choices game programmers have made for their games. If you've used a state machine in your game in any form, I'd be interested in knowing how you did it.

    Read the article

  • How do interpreters written in C and C++ bind identifiers to C(++) functions

    - by sub
    I'm talking about C and/or C++ here as this are the only languages I know used for interpreters where the following could be a problem: If we have an interpreted language X how can a library written for it add functions to the language which can then be called from within programs written in the language? PHP example: substr( $str, 5, 10 ); How is the function substr added to the "function pool" of PHP so it can be called from within scripts? It is easy for PHP storing all registered function names in an array and searching through it as a function is called in a script. However, as there obviously is no eval in C(++), how can the function then be called? I assume PHP doesn't have 100MB of code like: if( identifier == "substr" ) { return PHP_SUBSTR(...); } else if( ... ) { ... } Ha ha, that would be pretty funny. I hope you have understood my question so far. How do interpreters written in C/C++ solve this problem? How can I solve this for my own experimental toy interpreter written in C++?

    Read the article

  • How do C and C++ interpreters bind identifiers to functions

    - by sub
    I'm talking about C and/or C++ here as this are the only languages I know used for interpreters where the following could be a problem: If we have an interpreted language X how can a library written for it add functions to the language which can then be called from within programs written in the language? PHP example: substr( $str, 5, 10 ); How is the function substr added to the "function pool" of PHP so it can be called from within scripts? It is easy for PHP storing all registered function names in an array and searching through it as a function is called in a script. However, as there obviously is no eval in C(++), how can the function then be called? I assume PHP doesn't have 100MB of code like: if( identifier == "substr" ) { return PHP_SUBSTR(...); } else if( ... ) { ... } Ha ha, that would be pretty funny. I hope you have understood my question so far. How do C/C++ interpreters solve this problem? How can I solve this for my own experimental toy interpreter?

    Read the article

  • List of web-based interpreters of various programming languages

    - by Bolo
    Let's say you're away from your computer and all you've got is a web browser. You'd still like to run a piece of code (e.g. to check an answer on SO). What are your options? Let's create a list of on-line interpreters of various programming languages. Here are some examples: Python: http://try-python.mired.org/ Haskell: http://tryhaskell.org/ Scala: http://www.simplyscala.com/ Many languages: http://ideone.com/ Many languages: http://codepad.org/

    Read the article

  • Is Python Interpreted or Compiled?

    - by crodjer
    This is just a wondering I had while reading about interpreted and compiled languages. Ruby is no doubt an interpreted language, since source code is compiled by an interpreter at the point of execution. On the contrary C is a compiled language, as one have to compile the source code first according to the machine and then execute. This results is much faster execution. Now coming to Python: A python code (somefile.py) when imported creates a file (somefile.pyc) in the same directory. Let us say the import is done in a python shell or django module. After the import I change the code a bit and execute the imported functions again to find that it is still running the old code. This suggests that *.pyc files are compiled python files similar to executable created after compilation of a C file, though I can't execute *.pyc file directly. When the python file (somefile.py) is executed directly ( ./somefile.py or python somefile.py ) no .pyc file is created and the code is executed as is indicating interpreted behavior. These suggest that a python code is compiled every time it is imported in a new process to crate a .pyc while it is interpreted when directly executed. So which type of language should I consider it as? Interpreted or Compiled? And how does its efficiency compare to interpreted and compiled languages? According to wiki's Interpreted Languages page it is listed as a language compiled to Virtual Machine Code, what is meant by that? Update Looking at the answers it seems that there cannot be a perfect answer to my questions. Languages are not only interpreted or only compiled, but there is a spectrum of possibilities between interpreting and compiling. From the answers by aufather, mipadi, Lenny222, ykombinator, comments and wiki I found out that in python's major implementations it is compiled to bytecode, which is a highly compressed and optimized representation and is machine code for a virtual machine, which is implemented not in hardware, but in the bytecode interpreter. Also the the languages are not interpreted or compiled, but rather language implementations either interpret or compile code. I also found out about Just in time compilation As far as execution speed is concerned the various benchmarks cannot be perfect and depend on context and the task which is being performed. Please tell if I am wrong in my interpretations.

    Read the article

  • Requiring multithreading/concurrency for implementation of scripting language

    - by Ricky Stewart
    Here's the deal: I'm looking at designing my own scripting/interpreted language for fun. I'm only in the planning stages right now; I want to make sure I have a very strong hold on exactly how I will implement everything before I start coding. What I'm currently struggling with is concurrency. It seems to me like an easy way to avoid the unpredictable performance that comes with garbage collection would be to put the garbage collector in its own thread, and have it run concurrently with the interpreter itself. (To be clear, I don't plan to allow the scripts to be multithreaded themselves; I would simply put a garbage collector to work in a different thread than the interpreter.) This doesn't seem to be a common strategy for many popular scripting languages, probably for portability reasons; I would probably write the interpreter in the UNIX/POSIX threading framework initially and then port it to other platforms (Windows, etc.) if need be. Does anyone have any thoughts in this issue? Would whatever gains I receive by exploiting concurrency be nullified by the portability issues that will inevitably arise? (On that note, am I really correct in my assumption that I would experience great performance gains with a concurrent garbage collector?) Should I move forward with this strategy or step away from it?

    Read the article

  • What good books are out there on program execution models? [on hold]

    - by murungu
    Can anyone out there name a few books that address the topic of program execution models?? I want a book that can answer questions such as... What is the difference between interpreted and compiled languages and what are the performance consequences at runtime?? What is the difference between lazy evaluation, eager evaluation and short circuit evaluation?? Why would one choose to use one evaluation strategy over another?? How do you simulate lazy evaluation in a language that favours eager evaluation??

    Read the article

  • Why isn't there a python compiler to native machine code?

    - by user2986898
    As I understand, the cause of the speed difference between compiled languages and python is, that the first compiles code all way to the native machine's code, whereas python compiles to python bytecode, to be interpreted by the PVM. I see that this way python codes can be used on multiple operation system (at least in most cases), however I do not understand, why is not there an additional (and optional) compiler for python, which compiles the same way as traditional compilers. This would leave to the programmer to chose, which is more important to them; multiplatform executability or performance on native machine. In general; why are not there any languages which could be behave both as compiled and interpreted?

    Read the article

  • Making money from a custom built interpreter?

    - by annoying_squid
    I have been making considerable progress lately on building an interpreter. I am building it from NASM assembly code (for the core engine) and C (cl.exe the Microsoft compiler for the parser). I really don't have a lot of time but I have a lot of good ideas on how to build this so it appeals to a certain niche market. I'd love to finish this but I need to face reality here ... unless I can make some good monetary return on my investment, there is not a lot of time for me to invest. So I ask the following questions to anyone out there, especially those who have experience in monetizing their programs: 1) How easy is it for a programmer to make good money from one design? (I know this is vague but it will be interesting to hear from those who have experience or know of others' experiences). 2) What are the biggest obstacles to making money from a programming design? 3) For the parser, I am using the Microsoft compiler (no IDE) I got from visual express, so will this be an issue? Will I have to pay royalties or a license fee? 4) As far as I know NASM is a 2-clause BSD licensed application. So this should allow me to use NASM for commericial development unless I am missing something? It's good to know these things before launching into the meat and potatoes of the project.

    Read the article

  • Why is not there a python compiler to native machine's code?

    - by user2986898
    As I understand, the cause of the speed difference between compiled languages and python is, that the first compiles code all way to the native machine's code, whereas python compiles to python bytecode, to be interpreted by the PVM. I see that this way python codes can be used on multiple operation system (at least in most cases), however I do not understand, why is not there an additional (and optional) compiler for python, which compiles the same way as traditional compilers. This would leave to the programmer to chose, which is more important to them; multiplatform executability or performance on native machine. In general; why are not there any languages which could be behave both as compiled and interpreted?

    Read the article

  • Why aren't there native Javascript interpreters for Windows/Mac/Linux?

    - by MebAlone
    It seems to me it would be very useful to use Javascript for general server side scripting tasks as it has more or less the same features as Perl and Python. But AFAIK there are no generally available Javascript interpreters for the major machine architectures. I guess the other problem may be lack of libraries but surely these would come if the interpreters were there. Google's V8 maybe could be a starting point. Does anyone think we'll see this soon?

    Read the article

  • Interpreters: How much simplification?

    - by Ray
    In my interpreter, code like the following x=(y+4)*z echo x parses and "optimizes" down to four single operations performed by the interpreter, pretty much assembly-like: add 4 to y multiply <last operation result> with z set x to <last operation result> echo x In modern interpreters (for example: CPython, Ruby, PHP), how simplified are the "opcodes" for which are in end-effect run by the interpreter? Could I achieve better performance when trying to keep the structures and commands for the interpreter more complex and high-level? That would be surely a lot harder, or?

    Read the article

  • Interpreters: Handling includes/imports

    - by sub
    I've built an interpreter in C++ and everything works fine so far, but now I'm getting stuck with the design of the import/include/however you want to call it function. I thought about the following: Handling includes in the tokenizing process: When there is an include found in the code, the tokenizing function is recursively called with the filename specified. The tokenized code of the included file is then added to the prior position of the include. Disadvantages: No conditional includes(!) Handling includes during the interpreting process: I don't know how. All I know is that PHP must do it this way as conditional includes are possible. Now my questions: What should I do about includes? How do modern interpreters (Python/Ruby) handle this? Do they allow conditional includes?

    Read the article

  • How do interpreters functions written in the class C++ in the main

    - by T_Geek
    Hi I'm working on a project about Data structures. In the first , I wrote everything in main but it sounds like C . But as I learned, I tried to thinkk OOP and do as little as possible in my main() methods. I've implemented some opertation in my class like add,delet,find.it's too easy to implement its . class ARB { private: struct BT { int data; BT *l; BT *r; }; struct BT *p; public ARB(); ~ARB(); void del(int n); void add(int n); }; void ARB::del(int num) { //The code ,don't care about it }; main() { // BTR T; T.add(3); T.add(5); }; But I arrived to the big program How can I define a methode which have to use a binary tree and to get a stack STACK ARB::MyFunct(BT* p) { // The code don't care about it } How can I apply it in the main programme main() { // BT T; T.add(3); T.add(5); STACK S; BT* p S=T.MyFunct(p); // error C2664 cannot convert parametre 1 }; **mention :I implement STACK class

    Read the article

  • Any good C interpreters?

    - by NoMoreZealots
    I was looking at Ch from SofIntegration and it looks pretty interesting as a possible teaching tool. It would allow the you to let someone learning to program "play" while preparing them to write full fledged C programs. I was wondering if anybody had "good" experiences using a C interpreter or weather it would be a better to go with a language that is typically interpreter to start with?

    Read the article

  • What's the relationship between meta-circular interpreters, virtual machines and increased performance?

    - by Gomi
    I've read about meta-circular interpreters on the web (including SICP) and I've looked into the code of some implementations (such as PyPy and Narcissus). I've read quite a bit about two languages which made great use of metacircular evaluation, Lisp and Smalltalk. As far as I understood Lisp was the first self-hosting compiler and Smalltalk had the first "true" JIT implementation. One thing I've not fully understood is how can those interpreters/compilers achieve so good performance or, in other words, why is PyPy faster than CPython? Is it because of reflection? And also, my Smalltalk research led me to believe that there's a relationship between JIT, virtual machines and reflection. Virtual Machines such as the JVM and CLR allow a great deal of type introspection and I believe they make great use it in Just-in-Time (and AOT, I suppose?) compilation. But as far as I know, Virtual Machines are kind of like CPUs, in that they have a basic instruction set. Are Virtual Machines efficient because they include type and reference information, which would allow language-agnostic reflection? I ask this because many both interpreted and compiled languages are now using bytecode as a target (LLVM, Parrot, YARV, CPython) and traditional VMs like JVM and CLR have gained incredible boosts in performance. I've been told that it's about JIT, but as far as I know JIT is nothing new since Smalltalk and Sun's own Self have been doing it before Java. I don't remember VMs performing particularly well in the past, there weren't many non-academic ones outside of JVM and .NET and their performance was definitely not as good as it is now (I wish I could source this claim but I speak from personal experience). Then all of a sudden, in the late 2000s something changed and a lot of VMs started to pop up even for established languages, and with very good performance. Was something discovered about the JIT implementation that allowed pretty much every modern VM to skyrocket in performance? A paper or a book maybe?

    Read the article

  • Are there any free embedable REPL interpreters for a website? [migrated]

    - by Google
    I am hoping to find a free REPL interpreter for a number of languages. I am starting a new web page to help developers learn with a number of tutorials. I want to embed an interpreter on the site so users can have a tutorial and interpreter side by side. I really like free interpreters such as the one at repl.it. However, I am unable to find a free/embeddable interpreter. I was hoping to avoid making one myself-- they seem tricky to make safely! Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Are there any simple languages implemented using ANTLR or similar?

    - by etheros
    I'm trying to build a simple interpreted language for learning purposes. I've read countless theory and tutorials on ANTLR and JavaCC, but I can't figure out how to actually make it do something useful. I learn best by "taking something apart and putting it back together again", so, are there any working examples of simple languages implemented with the help of tools such as ANTLR, or similar? Something like the following might be nice: x = 1 if x == 1 print "true"

    Read the article

  • Any C/C++ to non-native bytecode compiler/interpreters?

    - by Matt
    As the title indicates, are there any C/C++ bytecode compilers/interpreters? I'm writing an application in an interpreted language that depends on certain libraries that are fully cross-compilable (there are no special flags to indicate code changes during compilation for a certain platform) but are written in C and C++. Rather than shipping n-platform-specific-libs with each platform, it would be nice to ship one set of libs which are interpreted by one platform specific interpreter. Possible and/or available?

    Read the article

  • Why are the interpreters of all popular scripting languages written in C (if not in C at least not i

    - by wndsr
    I recently asked a question on switching from C++ to C for writing an interpreter for speed and I got a comment from someone asking why on earth I would switch to C for that. So I found out that I actually don't know why - except that C++ object oriented system has a much higher abstraction and therefore is slower. Why are the interpreters of all popular scripting languages written in C and not in C++? If you want to tell me about some other language where the interpreter for it isn't in C, please replace all occurences of popular scripting languages in this question with Ruby, Python, Perl and PHP.

    Read the article

  • Catching Up with Lisp

    Support for multicore and Big Data are among the upcoming features of Franz's Lisp-based tools Lisp - Programming - Languages - FAQs Help and Tutorials - Compilers and Interpreters

    Read the article

  • OpenSource programming-languages in development?

    - by pile of junk
    I'm very interested in interpreter and compiler development and because I don't want to continue building mini compilers and interpreters I thought I could help some open-source project. Are there currently open-source projects on compilers/interpreters in early stages seeking developers? I mean yeah.. There won't be much to do for someone like me in Python, Ruby, and so on.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

1 2 3 4  | Next Page >