 | | Re: OO programing in RCX
|
| I should probably mention again that legOS supports C++, and supports it even better if you add void*builtin_new(size_t n){return malloc(n)}; to the appropriate library, as v0.3.0 will. The rest of this is off-topic. Dave Baum schrieb: (...) (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
| | | | | Re: OO programing in RCX
|
| (...) OO works very well for things like a parse tree. I can add a new statement and just add its rules for semantic checking and code generation...all within its own class. I think part of the problem is that compiler design is a very heavily (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
| | | | | Re: OO programing in RCX
|
| Dave Baum schrieb: (...) Yes, definitely so. Many concepts in parser generators are actually OO (bison result types, for example), but they aren't implemented that way. (...) Prof. Goos rather convincingly advocates generation as the do-all and (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
| | | | | Re: OO programing in RCX
|
| (...) If I were writing NQC from scratch, I'd agree. However, several years ago I was writing a preprocessor and bison wasn't available to me, so I hand-coded the parser. When NQC was started, I just reused about 90% of this parser. Of coruse, along (...) (25 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
| |
