[Oberon] OP2 vs. Single-Pass

Peter Matthias PeterMatthias at web.de
Wed Aug 2 20:39:09 CEST 2017

Am 02.08.2017 um 15:43 schrieb Michael McGaw:
> What is needed, with regard to OP2, IMHO:
> 1. It would be VERY useful to have a back end for OP2 that targeted a 
> purpose-built interpreter (processing something like byte code from a 
> linear file, not a tree-traversing interpreter).  Here, it would be very 
> helpful to have it support an instruction set for which a clean and 
> simple interpreter exists or can be built.  I am thinking specifically 
> of an instruction set not far from the Lilith-inspired KRONOS 32-bit 
> CPU.  This would permit a very portable interpreter that could be 
> retargeted with ease (use Ofront, for example, to machine generate a C 
> version).  Once this is accomplished, the systems, their compiler (and 
> target generators) and nearly all of the code base would live on 
> indefinitely.

How about WebAssembly? ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebAssembly )
Although I think it would be easier to base this on Project Oberon 
compiler front end as it does not need frame pointer.

BTW, interesting Kronoos history: 

More information about the Oberon mailing list