proguard-core VS Cwerg

Anyways, have you looked at Proguard core?

For generating Java bytecode/class files you could take a look at ProGuardCORE . It's a bytecode manipulation and analysis library that grew out of ProGuard.

The MethodBuilder "low-level" example looks like the ProGuardCORE API for building classes & code sequences, which can be written as:

Something else that could make your code generation for your JVM language easier: ProGuardCORE (https://github.com/Guardsquare/proguard-core). It can be used to read, generate and analyse Java bytecode.

Some examples for code generation: ProGuard where the project originated (https://github.com/Guardsquare/proguard), Brainf*ck compiler (https://github.com/mrjameshamilton/bf), Lox compiler (https://github.com/mrjameshamilton/klox)

Disclaimer: I work at Guardsquare on ProGuardCORE so may be biased ;)

I implemented Lox in Kotlin based on the book's Java interpreter then added a JVM backend using ProGuardCORE: https://github.com/mrjameshamilton/klox

You can find out more about ProGuardCORE on GitHub and the manual contains some further examples.

Not a book or guide but a useful library for working with/generating JVM class files is ProGuardCORE. It's the underlying library used by ProGuard and I also recently used it to add a JVM backend to my implementation of Lox from the Crafting Interpreters book.

After completing the first part of the book (using Kotlin instead of Java), I added a JVM backend using ProGuardCORE (https://github.com/Guardsquare/proguard-core).

The biggest difference is our initial goal of creating a tool for application developers rather than a security team. This means we aim to exclude information that the application developer definitely knows and doesn't want to see again, e.g. the list of permissions an application is requesting. Furthermore we try to focus on nice and intuitive UX that is familiar to this audience, enabling an application developer to be very efficient in reading & interpreting the results (e.g. easy comparison of two builds). Also note that this is built on the same core technology as ProGuard. This foundation of compiler components (e.g. our partial evaluator) and the knowledge and experience at Guardsquare that comes with it will unlock many more in-depth code checks.

Perhaps these have already been dealt with and I'm missing critical information. If so, my apologies. Great work, in any case.

[1] https://github.com/robertmuth/Cwerg/tree/master/FrontEnd#dis...

Cwerg has backend that can be used as JIT and is written with readability in mind. Additional documentation can be found here: https://github.com/robertmuth/Cwerg/tree/master/Docs

I defined a basic ISA-like IR for Cwerg. It has unlimited registers and no constraints on immediates.

entire compiler front end ast nodes

I was also going down the path of bike shedding concrete syntax for my language Cwerg before pulling the plug on that effort and just using s-exprs. I managed to make the s-expr quite succinct by carefully choosing the order of arguments so I can omit optional ones. Also very helpful was to use square brackets for list, e.g. (call fun-name [arg1 arg2]). This simplifies parsing a little bit and is easier on the eye. Here are some Code Examples

I am iterating over the languages features for Cwerg's Frontend which aims to be a low level language with about the complexity of C but with some of the comforts of modern languages. I am especially happy with the choice of adding sum types. Relative to C the current feature set looks like this: Removed: * arrays decay to pointers * bitfields * separate compilation (more of a backend issue) * pre-processor * varargs * implcit type conversions * (untagged) unions * ++/-- * comma operator * implicitly nullable pointers * goto