From: Hal Fulton <hal9000@...>
Date: 2004-11-10T16:21:50+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby code generation: string vs. AST based (2.0 or beyond)

itsme213 wrote:
> Code generation in ruby is great.
> 
> The only thing I find is that, since it is essentially all string
> manipulation prior to eval, none of it is executable (or testable!) until it
> is eval'd. So I find myself writing straight code, testing it, then mentally
> abstracting out the string patterns in that code, then using those in my
> code generation.
> 
> Reading those string patterns more than a day later makes my brain hurt.
> 
> What are the chances, somewhere in or beyond 2.0, of code generation being
> based on something more like the following:
>  - write and test executable code
>  - get access to an AST of that code itself
>  - implement code generation by cloning/modifying the AST clone
> 
> This would require a published AST, some manipulations on it, and an eval
> that takes ASTs.

I'm very much in favor of that. I think it is planned, but I don't think
the plan is mature yet.


Hal