3 ms·
Well, ouch, a transpiler writer has to code up a bit of boilerplate, most of it just once early on in the project's life-time.. "too bad"! IMHO reconstructing s
by dualogy 9y ago
Well, ouch, a transpiler writer has to code up a bit of boilerplate, most of it just once early on in the project's life-time.. "too bad"! IMHO reconstructing stuff may be a somewhat tricky challenge, but there's no intrinsic need for it to be "messy" regardless of the target language? I must be missing something here still.. =)
I'm doing transpilation to Go right now, so often I think "much of this would have been much simpler to get done if I transpiled instead to an anything-goes scripting language". (Reason of course being I want to emit idiomatic human-written-like code, and working with mostly-incomplete type information coming in, still reconstruct types rather than pass-and-return-typeless-boxed-values-around messily.) A lot of this is pretty "messy" right now, but I place all of the blame for that on me (guess I prefer rodeo-ing into it rather than "sitting down and writing a formal paper on it first"), neither the target or source language.
- TazeTSchnitzel 9y ago> there's no intrinsic need for it to be "messy" regardless of the target language The generated code with “re”constructed control flow is going to be a mess and you can't really help it. Worst-case it'll be a `while(1) { switch(i) {` type of thing.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]