Re: neos Universal Compiler and FORTRAN IV

On 2025-03-28 14:14:10 +0000, Mr Flibble said:

On Fri, 28 Mar 2025 14:01:40 +0200, Mikko wrote:
 

On 2025-03-19 16:11:18 +0000, Mikko said:
 

On 2025-03-19 14:32:30 +0000, Mr Flibble said:
 

On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 12:26:20 +0200, Mikko wrote:
 

On 2025-03-18 14:08:50 +0000, Mr Flibble said:
 

On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 15:59:45 +0200, Mikko wrote:
 

On 2025-03-17 16:53:01 +0000, Mr Flibble said:
 

On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 11:21:05 +0200, Mikko wrote:
 

On 2025-03-16 18:40:42 +0000, Mr Flibble said:
 

On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 12:28:24 +0200, Mikko wrote:
 

On 2025-03-15 15:08:47 +0000, Mr Flibble said:
 

On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 11:55:52 +0200, Mikko wrote:
 

On 2025-03-15 04:00:52 +0000, Mr Flibble said:
 

Hi!
 neos universal compiler (that can compile any programming
language)
is successfully running the tokenization stage tokenizing a
program written in the neos reference language. #cpp #coding
#compiler #compsci #gamedev
 /Flibble

 Can it tokenize FORTRAN 60 or FORTRAN IV ?

 ANY programming language.
 /Flibble

 How is neos configured to tokenize FORTRAN 60 ?

 The same way you would configure it for any other programming
language.

 If it is configured the same for each programming language then
how does it know how to tokenize?

 You configure it by providing a language specific neosBNF schema
(grammar)
file (an input to the compilalation process).

 Is there a neosBNF schema that describes the tokens of FORtRAN 66
or Algol 60?

 Not yet.

 The definition of string literal of Algol 60 would be a good example
of something that cannot be defined with a regular expression and is
therefore impossible or at least complicated with an ordinary
tokenizer.

 neos does not use regular expressions and the neos grammar is context
sensitive (i.e. not context free).

 A context free grammar should be enough for tokenizing strings of Algol
60.
 Tokenizing statements of FORTRAN 66 is a harder problem.

 Some test cases for a FORTRAN IV tokenizer:
 REALITY IS, AS I MAY LOGICALLY SAY, REAL LOGICAL = WHAT I SAY
 Note that these lines begin with 8 spaces.
 Tokens on the first line:
keyword REAL identifier ITYIS comma identifier ASIMAY end of statement
 Tokens on the second line:
keyword LOGICAL identifier LYSAY comma identifier REAL end of statement
 Tokens on the third line:
identifier LOGICAL assignment symbol identifier WHAT I SAY
 Parser needs to know whether an instance of REAL or LOGICAL is an
identifier or keyword.
 I don't understand how neos can be configred to tokenize the above test
lines and other FORTRAN IV statements.

 If a native FORTRAN IV compiler can parse it then neos can parse it as
long as it is somehow expressable in the neos attribute grammar.

If you don't know how to express it in the neos attribute grammar then
nobody knows and neos is not universal, at lieast in the practical sense.
--
Mikko