* [GCC front end] add new TREE CODE
@ 2011-02-14 17:44 charfi asma
2011-02-14 17:48 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2011-02-14 23:59 ` Andi Hellmund
0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: charfi asma @ 2011-02-14 17:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-help
Hello,
I am developping my own gcc front end. My source language contains concepts that
are not represented directly in C code.
to compile those elements, I think that I should add a new tree codes to my
front end as C++ does for templates...
I think that I should also implement how to translate this new tree code in
Gimple.
my question is : should I also care about how to translate those tree code al
over the compiler chain: gimple --> ssa --> unssa --> rtl --> ass ...
did you suggest to follow an example of an existing front end that adds some
tree code cause the C++ one seems to be mature and complete.
thank you very much
Asma
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [GCC front end] add new TREE CODE
2011-02-14 17:44 [GCC front end] add new TREE CODE charfi asma
@ 2011-02-14 17:48 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2011-02-14 23:59 ` Andi Hellmund
1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Ian Lance Taylor @ 2011-02-14 17:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: charfi asma; +Cc: gcc-help
charfi asma <charfiasma@yahoo.fr> writes:
> I am developping my own gcc front end. My source language contains concepts that
> are not represented directly in C code.
> to compile those elements, I think that I should add a new tree codes to my
> front end as C++ does for templates...
> I think that I should also implement how to translate this new tree code in
> Gimple.
> my question is : should I also care about how to translate those tree code al
> over the compiler chain: gimple --> ssa --> unssa --> rtl --> ass ...
> did you suggest to follow an example of an existing front end that adds some
> tree code cause the C++ one seems to be mature and complete.
First let me say that if your language is very different from C you
probably shouldn't be using trees at all.
But if your language is mostly like C then using trees is reasonable.
Even the C frontend itself has language-specific tree codes; see
c-family/c-common.def. Or look at Objective C, at objc/objc-tree.def.
Ian
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [GCC front end] add new TREE CODE
2011-02-14 17:44 [GCC front end] add new TREE CODE charfi asma
2011-02-14 17:48 ` Ian Lance Taylor
@ 2011-02-14 23:59 ` Andi Hellmund
2011-02-21 11:26 ` Re : " charfi asma
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Andi Hellmund @ 2011-02-14 23:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: charfi asma; +Cc: gcc-help
Hey Asma,
> my question is : should I also care about how to translate those tree code al
> over the compiler chain: gimple --> ssa --> unssa --> rtl --> ass ...
>
The idea of GCC's modularization is that a front-end should maximally
care about GIMPLE. All the other transformations are done by the
middle-end.
> did you suggest to follow an example of an existing front end that adds some
> tree code cause the C++ one seems to be mature and complete.
>
Yes, the C++ front-end uses quite a lot of own TREE codes, but I would
then start with a very simple one and check how it "translates" the TREE
codes into a GIMPLE sequence, e.g. by looking at the 'gimplify_expr'
language hook which is 'cp_gimplify_expr' for C++.
I hope that helps. If you have any further question about the specific
transformation from TREE codes to GIMPLE, just let us know ...
Andi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re : [GCC front end] add new TREE CODE
2011-02-14 23:59 ` Andi Hellmund
@ 2011-02-21 11:26 ` charfi asma
2011-02-21 14:27 ` Andi Hellmund
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: charfi asma @ 2011-02-21 11:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andi Hellmund; +Cc: gcc-help
----- Message d'origine ----
De : Andi Hellmund <mail@andihellmund.com>
À : charfi asma <charfiasma@yahoo.fr>
Cc : gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
Envoyé le : Lun 14 février 2011, 18h 48min 26s
Objet : Re: [GCC front end] add new TREE CODE
Hey Asma,
> my question is : should I also care about how to translate those tree code al
> over the compiler chain: gimple --> ssa --> unssa --> rtl --> ass ...
>
The idea of GCC's modularization is that a front-end should maximally care about
GIMPLE. All the other transformations are done by the middle-end.
> did you suggest to follow an example of an existing front end that adds some
> tree code cause the C++ one seems to be mature and complete.
>
Yes, the C++ front-end uses quite a lot of own TREE codes, but I would then
start with a very simple one and check how it "translates" the TREE codes into a
GIMPLE sequence, e.g. by looking at the 'gimplify_expr' language hook which is
'cp_gimplify_expr' for C++.
I hope that helps. If you have any further question about the specific
transformation from TREE codes to GIMPLE, just let us know ...
Andi
Hello,
thank you Andi and Ian for your help ;)
In fact, my language is moslty like C (var, function, call exp, if else, ...)
but there is some difference, for example, I have State and transitions concepts
which I can translate in C (set of states presented as enumerations and
transitions as array of a defined type Transition which is a struct with source
state, target state, guard, ...)
what I want to try, is to add a new tree codes to directly translate State,
transtion, event, ... and do not use Array, enumeration of C language.
Ian said in his response that if my language is very different than C I should
not use trees. Have you any idea of what I can use instead ?
I look at the ghdl front end and I did not find vhdl-tree.def to see if they
defined a new tree code for this fe.
I asked the question in their mailing list but I did not get an answer :(
I will probably (as you suggested before) look at the cp front end and may be
the java one also.
thank you again for your help
Asma
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Re : [GCC front end] add new TREE CODE
2011-02-21 11:26 ` Re : " charfi asma
@ 2011-02-21 14:27 ` Andi Hellmund
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Andi Hellmund @ 2011-02-21 14:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: charfi asma; +Cc: gcc-help
>
> Ian said in his response that if my language is very different than C I should
> not use trees. Have you any idea of what I can use instead ?
>
>
Hey Asma,
I'm not sure what Ian meant in detail, but I think that he wanted to say
that you then shouldn't possibly use the TREE codes and
tree-representation of GCC, but to use whatever intermediate
representation is appropriate for your needs. If you would look up the
literature, you would find tree-based structures as dominant
intermediate structure, but most of these books then refer to
C-syntax-like languages. Though, it is generally hard to predict which
structure perfectly matches your needs. As said, you could use whatever
you want. All you need to make sure is to finally translate to GIMPLE at
some point.
> I look at the ghdl front end and I did not find vhdl-tree.def to see if they
> defined a new tree code for this fe.
>
This file is not mandatory, I think. So, if they don't use one, they
might not use additional tree codes. Well, if they use GENERC/tree-based
IR at all!
Best regards,
Andi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-02-21 14:03 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-02-14 17:44 [GCC front end] add new TREE CODE charfi asma
2011-02-14 17:48 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2011-02-14 23:59 ` Andi Hellmund
2011-02-21 11:26 ` Re : " charfi asma
2011-02-21 14:27 ` Andi Hellmund
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).