ooc-dev team mailing list archive

["Vincent R." <forumer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 13:51:56 +0200, Amos Wenger <amoswenger@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> Depending on what you read, it means either the rock compiler
> project<http://github.com/amoswenger/rock>(in which case standalone
> means not dependant from Java / self-hosting),
> either that: currently, generating C files is the only "real backend"
> that's
> implemented for the ooc language. However, I had in mind from the start
> that
> the language's design should stay flexible enough that we could implement
> other backends. Before ooc, I had another project, which generated
assembly
> code as understood by Nasm, the Netwide Assembler. But for ooc it seemed
> simpler to just generate C code and be done with it.
> However, for the future, I'd love to see appear a LibJIT backend, an LLVM
> backend, and maybe a GNU as backend (the assembler that gcc uses).
> Implementing such backends would help the ooc language specification to
> stay
> target-agnostic. It can only do good, as long as every implementation
> conform to the standard (still under discussion/construction).
> 
My concerns is about embedded world, because if one day you provide a
backend I hope there
will be first a gcc one, because current toolchain are based on it(wince,
symbian and iPhone).
So if a gcc backend exist it would allow to patch toolchains sources and
provide it for the embedded platforms.
But for now I think generating C files is a good choice.