Ruby to C transpiler

Are there any?

my dictionary does not know the word “transpile”
what do you what?
evaluating ruby code inside an C Program or porting c-structs or c++
classes into ruby objects?

both is possible

Hans M. wrote in post #1013095:

my dictionary does not know the word “transpile”
what do you what?

I wondered as well. To me it sounds like “read a Ruby program and
output a pile of C code” where “pile” doesn’t necessarily need to be a
complete program. :slight_smile:

evaluating ruby code inside an C Program or porting c-structs or c++
classes into ruby objects?

Or translate a Ruby program into a C program?

Kind regards

robert

Hans M. wrote in post #1013101:

translating an ruby program into an c program is not as simple possible
because of ducktyping and dynamic stuff like including and extending
objects ans classes

Performance gains would probably be marginal - unless all the dynamic
features were omitted.

c or c++ chould not handle that as simple

Nobody talked about “simple” though.

Btw, this is exactly what was asked:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transpiler

Cheers

robert

Hmm

It would seem to assume that the source is a subset to the target
language. Which would explain Pascal to C but the unlikeliness of C to
Pascal.

So perhaps Ruby to Scheme which could then be compiled with the Gambit
Scheme compiler.

Not sure what the upside would be other than the bragging rights :slight_smile:

translating an ruby program into an c program is not as simple possible
because of ducktyping and dynamic stuff like including and extending
objects ans classes

c or c++ chould not handle that as simple

On Jul 26, 2011, at 05:18 , Intransition wrote:

Are there any?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q="ruby+to+c"

Thomas S. wrote in post #1013086:

Are there any?

Translators I know of are ruby2c and ruby2cext:

https://rubyforge.org/projects/ruby2c/
https://rubyforge.org/projects/ruby2cext/

Never tried the later.


Luis L.

On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Peter H.
[email protected] wrote:

It would seem to assume that the source is a subset to the target
language. Which would explain Pascal to C but the unlikeliness of C to
Pascal.

Well, both Pascal and C are Turing complete - so conversion in either
direction is possible. Of course, if you look to the small details
needed for driver implementations such as direct memory access a
standard Pascal will have a hard time doing all C’s tricks. But this
is basically just a question of the standard library provided.

Kind regards

robert

On Jul 26, 2011, at 07:11 , Robert K. wrote:

Hans M. wrote in post #1013101:

translating an ruby program into an c program is not as simple possible
because of ducktyping and dynamic stuff like including and extending
objects ans classes

Performance gains would probably be marginal - unless all the dynamic
features were omitted.

For type-inferred code we saw ~12x improvements. For straight
translations w/ fully dynamic ruby we saw marginal performance losses
because we couldn’t cheat the way the interpreter does (eg regexp match
nodes dispatched directly where we had to use rb_funcall or we couldn’t
take advantage of COW string hacks).

I demonstrated this in my rubyconf 2005 talk. I don’t think any video of
it exists.

c or c++ chould not handle that as simple

Nobody talked about “simple” though.

Translating was a lot less tough than I thought it would be (compared
to, say, the parsing of ruby).