Can a Class Library be built containing c code? If so, how?
If by that you mean whether it's possible to write object oriented code in C, then yes. The first results from Google when searching for Object Oriented Programming in C:
Object Oriented Programming in C
Object-Oriented Programming with ANSI C (PDF)
ANSI C and object-oriented programming
I'm sure you can find the rest of the few hundred different papers on the topic.
A good example is the GLib library.
Related
I am writing a thesis about Robot Framework. I would like include a part about Chomsky Hierarchy, and describe in which hierarchy, does it belong to. As far as i can understand it, most programming languages can be described by CFG (Context Free Grammar) but are not part of it (eg. checking if variable was defined in C or multiple levels of parentheses). My question is if Robot Framework can be described in CFG -> can be checked with non-deterministic push down automat. I think it can by because of the table-like format of its syntax.
I'm a secondary school student currently taking the OCR Computer Science GCSE (J276). I taught myself to program and was recently surprised by the context of a question in one of OCR's specimen papers (this one) as it goes against my knowledge of programming.
In question 5b, a question goes on to ask for a description of the differences between compilers and interpreters:
Harry can use either a compiler or an interpreter to translate the code [that he has created].
This confused me, as it seemed to suggest that the code written could either be interpreted or compiled in order to run, which would be odd as it was my understanding that languages fit into one of two boxes, interpreted (python, javascript) or compiled (c++, java), rather than fitting into both.
Is it true that a single programming language can be either compiled or interpreted based on the programmer's desire, or is this another case of OCR simplifying the course to make it easier to understand?
C is a language that is usually compiled, but interpreted implementations exist.
According to #delnan in this answer,
First off, interpreted/compiled is not a property of the language but a property of the implementation. For most languages, most if not all implementations fall in one category, so one might save a few words saying the language is interpreted/compiled too, but it's still an important distinction, both because it aids understanding and because there are quite a few languages with usable implementations of both kinds (mostly in the realm of functional languages, see Haskell and ML). In addition, there are C interpreters and projects that attempt to compile a subset of Python to C or C++ code (and subsequently to machine code).
In reality, it looks like the designers of your course said something that was true in theory, but in practice tends to be more restricted. This is found all over programming and, in fact, the world in general. Could you write a JavaScript compiler for Commodore 64? Sure, the C64 implements a full, general purpose computer system, and JavaScript is Turing Complete. Just because something is possible doesn't mean that a lot of people actually do it, though, or that it is easy.
I'm writing a compiler to generate a JSON code from a random simple text but I didn't understand the type of these kind of compiler. can I consider it as a source-to-source compiler?
A source-to-source compiler is a compiler that takes the source code of a program written in one programming language as its input and produces the equivalent source code in another programming language.
(the problem is the input is a text, not a the source code of a program written in one programming language)
Or is there another type for these kind of compilers?
and thank you
Generally, a source-to-source compiler is understood to
translate between programming languages that operate at approximately the same level of abstraction
wiki
Thus, I would argue -- that if by "random simple text" you mean a simple English phase -- you are just writing a regular old compiler.
I.E., I would consider English a "high-level language," and JSON a relatively "low-level language." Thus meaning that you are compiling from a higher level of abstraction to a lower level of abstraction -- just like a regular compiler.
Brief Description
I have a college work where I have to implement a graph library (I'll have to give a presentation about this work later)
The basic idea is to write all the code of the data structures and their algorithms from scratch, using the tools provided by some programming language, like C/C++, Java, Python, doesn't really matter which one of them I'll pick at first.
But I should not use any built-in graph libraries in the language: the goal of the work is to make the students learn how these algorithms work. There are some test cases which my program will be later submitted to.
It is not really necessary but, if you wanna take a look, here is the homework assignment: http://pastebin.com/GdtvMTMR (I used Control-C Control-V plus google translate from a LaTeX text, this is why the formatting is poor).
The Question
So, my question is: which programming language would be more time efficient to implement this library?
It doesn't really matter if the language is functional, structured or object oriented. My priority is time efficiency and performance.
The better language is the one you know more.
But if you're looking for some performance, take a look at compiled languages with optimisations. Keep in mind that the code you write is the major component responsible in final performance, the language itself cant do miracles.
A more low level language give to you controls but requires deeply knowledge of the language and the machine you're running your code, so it's a tradeoff.
By a personal choose I would recommend C/C++ to implement a graph library. I've already done this in the past and I used vanilla ANSI C and the performance was awesome.
The one you feel more passionate about and feel more comfortable coding with.
This way you will rock your project.
Myself would pick Java.
I would like to know about the extent of support for cuda in rose compiler. I am trying to build a source to source translator for cuda. Is it possible using Rose compiler? Which distribution of Rose compiler should I use?
I know this has been discussed earlier (support for cuda in rose compiler), but I cannot understand whether cuda support is there or not. Rose user manual does not have much information either.
Rose has a C++ front end and a Fortran front end that seem reasonably well integrated. The Rose system design IMHO is not amenable to easy integration of other front end parsers (such as you would need presumably to parse Cuda), although with enough effort you could do it. (Rose originally only had C++, and Fortran was grafted on).
If you don't see explicit mention of Cuda in the Rose manuals, its pretty like because it simply isn't there.
If you want to process Cuda using source to source transformations, you'll need both a Cuda parser and an appropriate set of transformation machinery something like what Rose has.
I cannot offer you a Cuda parser, but my company does provide industrial strength source-to-source program transformation systems in the form the DMS Software Reengineering Toolkit.
DMS has been used to carry out massive transformations on large C++ systems, so I think it quite reasonable to say it is at least as competent as Rose for that purpose. DMS has also been used to process extremely large C and Fortran systems, and other codes in Java, C#, ECMAScript, PHP, and many other languages, so I think it safe to say it is considerably easier to integrate a different front end into DMS.
Cuda, as I understand it, is a C99 derivative. DMS has a C front end, with explicit support for building various C dialects. Most of C99 is already built using the dialect mechanism. That might be a pretty good starting point.
You can try other tools such as ANTLR as an alternative, but I think it will soon become obvious that ANTLR, and Rose and DMS are in very different leagues in terms of their ability to parse, analyze and transform complex systems of real code.