Re: [C--] Is it worth reviving C--?

| Most of our users have reported that it is very easy to adapt a legacy
| compiler to generate C-- code, but nobody has been willing to attempt
| to adapt a legacy run-time system to work with the C-- run-time interface.

I don't know whether this'll be any use to anyone except us, but we're using C-- like crazy inside GHC (the Glasgow Haskell Compiler).  But not as an arms-length language.  Instead, inside GHC's compilation pipeline we use C-- as an internal data type; and after this summer's work by John Dias, we now have quite a respectable story on transforming, and framework for optimizing, this C-- code.  Since some of the runtime system is written in C--, we also have a route for parsing C-- and compiling it down the same pipeline.

All that said, this is a *GHC specific* variant of C--. It does not support the full generality of C--'s runtime interface (it is specific to GHC's RTS), nor is it intended as a full C-- implementation.  In its present state it's not usable as a standalone C-- compiler.  Still, it is a live, actively-developed implementation of something close to C--, and so might be of interest to some.

Simon
_______________________________________________
Cminusminus mailing list
[email protected]
https://cminusminus.org/mailman/listinfo/cminusminus