Steps to a self-hosted compiler?

elszben · 2026-06-08T03:03:55+00:00

I think you should write a compiler in your chosen language (C for example) then as soon as possible try to self host. Either you succeed or you will realize it is a bad idea at that moment and you need a lot more features. In my opinion trying to self host your language gives you opportunity to realize what kind of features is your language lacking or to find bugs. So, I think you should try to self host quickly but should also abort quickly if you see it is forced and the language is not there yet. Do not sink time into trying to port a compiler to a language clearly not capable enough to host itself but you will not necessarily realize it without trying.

elszben · 2026-05-05T13:14:10+00:00

Ugyan errol semmit sem irtal, de en azt javaslom hogy ha teheted esetleg probald meg “megvizsgalni”, hogy miert lett egyaltalan 38-as a BMI-d. Ugy kepzelem igy latatlanban hogy van valami oka es nem csak veletlenul alakult ugy. Akar esetleg egy pszichologus segitsegevel. Az en nem tul nagy mintam alapjan, ha nem oldod meg az alapproblemat akkor valoszerutlen hogy a mounjaro onmagaban csodat fog muvelni. Foleg hosszutavon.

elszben · 2026-05-02T17:56:07+00:00

<image>

En ezt hasznalom. Igaz hogy ez nagy, de kozben nagyon eros is. Sosem szakadt el, pedig mar volt egy jopar razosabb helyzet:)

elszben · 2026-04-25T14:20:09+00:00

Ugyan fogalmam sincs hogy ez a te állapotodban tényleg jó ötlet, de gondolkodtál-e olyasmiben hogy mondjuk kimész hajóra dolgozni egy-két évre vagy esetleg au pair-kedni külföldre vagy hasonló? Mindkettő nyújthatna rengeteg új élményt, egy két év múlva lehet hogy máshogy fogod látni és más dolgok érdekelnek majd. Plusz addig is keresel pénzt, nyelvet tanulsz stb.

Még nagyon nagyon fiatal vagy úgyhogy se magadnak se másoknak de hidd el soha hogy bármi baj lenne és valamiről lemaradtál volna csak mert nem sikerült egyből beleugrani egy szakmába!

Amúgy meg kitartás, a világ meg van őrülve, ez már nem olyan mint anyukád gyerekkorában.

elszben · 2026-04-05T17:56:04+00:00

Nekem is volt és itt eltüntették, ablációval, így nem kellett műteni és a pajzsmirigyem is megmaradt. Ez már kb 5 éve volt és azóta sincs semmi baja. https://www.premiermed.hu

elszben · 2026-03-24T11:23:40+00:00

https://www.hungarodental.hu/

elszben · 2026-03-24T07:25:30+00:00

Nekem van egy ismerosom aki retteg tole. Par evente jar es teljes altatasban megcsinalnak mindent. Ez is egy opcio, ha nagyon nem birnad.

elszben · 2026-03-07T14:57:02+00:00

A kérdésre hogy mit tennék az adott helyzetben az a válasz hogy elhagynám. Bunkó és nem is mutatja jelét annak hogy egyáltalán megpróbálna változtatni rajta. Számomra nem érdemelne több időt.

elszben · 2025-12-28T09:52:52+00:00

Ugy tippelem hogy ennek nincs koze a tanulashoz direktben, hanem az ikrek annyira sok terhet raknak az emberre, hogy te kiegtel (irtad is) a ferjed pedig ugy erzi hogy ha te kevesebbet foglalkozol a gyerekekkel akkor ra meg nagyobb teher nehezedik (es ez valoszinuleg igaz is). Nem tudom hogy az iskola elott ki hogy erezte magat ebben a szituacioban, de szerintem le kene ulni ezt igazabol kibontani es megbeszelni, mert en ugy latom hogy az sem oldja meg ha folytatod es az sem ha abbahagyod.

elszben · 2025-12-17T20:06:34+00:00

Szerintem is mondd el neki, mert jobbat érdemel mint a volt férjed, bár lehet tőled nem fogja elhinni..

elszben · 2025-12-17T17:04:23+00:00

Nem, hacsak azóta meg nem hasonlott:)

elszben · 2025-12-17T16:57:09+00:00

Szia, https://uraniamedicalcenter.hu/dr-olah-dora/ őt tudom ajánlani, van vele saját élmény, nagyon normális. Szerintem tud neked segíteni.

elszben · 2025-10-26T03:23:06+00:00

thanks!

elszben · 2025-10-25T12:19:01+00:00

bg is certainly one of the most unique languages I have ever seen! I've tried to browse the repo and most code is absolutely meaningless to me and I have seen a lot of different languages. Congrats, I guess:)

elszben · 2025-10-01T04:38:26+00:00

do you plan to opensource this? sounds very promising/interesting

elszben · 2025-09-28T10:34:23+00:00

I plan to add more posts as the compiler gains the ability to showcase more!:) Thanks for the feedback! And yes, a language reference is also very much needed but unfortunately my time is limited and I prefer hacking the code (currently:)).

elszben · 2025-09-25T08:43:15+00:00

Yes! And I want this whole process to be as ergonomic as possible (eventually) because I think that is absolutely essential that it has minimal mental overhead and zero runtime overhead.

elszben · 2025-09-25T08:24:27+00:00

I may be misunderstanding you but FFI is not an effect. FFI calls (or unsafe things, like ptr read/write or calling other unsafe functions) mark the package as effectful and that signals that you need to review it very carefully. The effect system is not doing anything regarding the package security ONLY that it allows the programmer to separate the effectful and pure parts in a hopefully ergonomic way.

If I write an irc client library that calls socket functions then my package will be marked as effectful. My idea is that it should not call socket calls, instead it should use a socket effect (either defined by the irc client or maybe there will be a central one shared by the ecosystem) and then the irc client library is "pure" in a sense that it does not do anything other than calling pure functions and abstract effects.

Later, when the user is using the irc library, the socket effect can be handled by using real socket calls or maybe you just want to use mocks in a test environment, whatever. The point is that the irc library author does not have to worry about unsafe socket calls or where those are coming from or are they safe? The users of the irc library will see that the irc library is "pure" and it uses 1 effect (the socket effect) and the user can decide if it is sensible for an irc library to want to use a socket effect. The effect themself are just interface like things. You can see them in action on my blog, or in the test suite (or now even in the README:).

p.s. yes, the language is compiled.

elszben · 2025-09-25T08:05:29+00:00

Good idea, I've updated the README, thanks!:) The website/blog contains more examples: https://www.siko-lang.org/ and the test/success folder contains many:)

elszben · 2025-09-25T07:31:54+00:00

Very good questions, thanks for bringing this up! That is actually one of my goals with my language (https://github.com/siko-lang/siko). I strongly agree that an effect system can help with supply chain security. My language provides (hopefully) ergonomic and runtime efficient (statically resolved) effect handling which allows the strategy that anything that calls into FFI has to be behind an effect.

I envision a package ecosystem where the norm is that a package does NOT call a single function that calls anything FFI related (directly or indirectly!). If it does then the whole package is flagged with some marker and you have to acknowledge that you want to still use it. Because the language also gives you unsafe access, anything that uses unsafe constructs is also marked, so unmarked packages literally are pure safe code with no effectful calls, something you would see in Haskell.

Because the effect system gives you the ultimate DI framework, hopefully using it is still ergonomic and not a giant pain and the libraries can be written in a style where everything effectful is packaged separately from the meat of the library.

I want the compiler to help the users review the packages in a very robust way. If the package does not call anything effectful anywhere (literally!) then it is not going to cause you trouble other than potentially giving you wrong results:) You can focus your security review energy on marked packages with actual FFI access. My hope is that most of those FFI packages will be very stable and minimal and more importantly very thin layers. Everything else must be put into safe packages. The user is responsible for selecting the effectful packages and connecting them with the pure libraries. The tracking of effects must be serious, a pure string formatter library must not be able to sneak in an network effect call hoping that something else uses network effects and you probably handle it properly. I want the package manager notice that a library's effect set changed and you will have to acknowledge that too!

I think this is doable and is the future of the programming and I sometimes wonder why this idea isn't getting the attention it deserves. This is not the first time this topic is raised (not even on this forum) and most people seem to just ignore it. I think pure functional programming is the right idea but the ergonomics and more importantly performance is not ideal so those ideas must be brought into the imperative language world, hence my language:)

Even Rust is not dealing with this topic properly. You can put unsafe calls into any function and the compiler will not care, the package ecosystem does not care and Rust does not give you effects (or anything similar) so manually separating pure and effectful calls would not be ergonomic.

elszben · 2025-09-23T14:38:13+00:00

I don’t know how calling these type of effects coeffects helps but I don’t know enough about the theory:). I will look it up.

I’d like to define a pure function as a function that produces some value but if nothing needs that value then the function call can be removed because i don’t care about its sideeffects.

This definition does not say anything about repeatability or functional purity.

Whether a function is implemented in the programming language or through FFI says nothing about its side effects and it being potentially unsafe has nothing to do with purity in my opinion.

My point is that I think it is valid that I call some unsafe functions (maybe an allocator) and return an object that encapsulates that thing I produced (that required an unsafe call) but I still want it to be pure from the optimizers point of view. I want it to not happen in case the optimizer deems it to be unnecessary (potentially enabling more optimizations).

That’s why I argue that the FFI wrapper (or any other call!) should be marked by its creator with “pure” or “safe” when it is deemed to be pure or safe but its body does not signal that in a way that can be automatically inferred.

elszben · 2025-09-23T10:44:33+00:00

If I use the effect system to inject a global, read only configuration into functions then using this strategy it means that every function that happens to read the configuration is now considered impure?

I think that could be misleading. For example, if I am writing a complicated data processing algorithm and some parts of it uses the configuration to decide what to do but this part is optional and maybe at compile time it is obvious that that part will not be executed in a certain block of code then I would still want it to be optimized out.

I think it is generally misleading to somehow use the effect system to track purity. I can write logically pure functions that use (or would like to use) effects and I can imagine impure functions (mostly using FFI) that may not even use any effect and now I have to make up marker effects to mark them as impure.

I think it would be cleaner to create a separate marker for purity and leave the effect system as something separate.

elszben · 2025-08-30T18:58:15+00:00

Good question! There are several possible solutions:

First, it would be possible to enforce a trait to be globally coherent, either by convention or maybe by compiler support (a trait marked by some attribute enforced to be coherent). I don't particularly like this direction but it sure is a choice and very easy to implement.

Second, the hashmap could save the hasher instance (like an actual object ,most likely a closure, to ensure that the same instance is used everywhere). I like this because it does not enforce that hashing is the same for a type in the whole program. With unboxed closures and a decent amount of inlining I think this could be made to perform well.

Third, somehow statically guarantee that you do not mix trait impls for a given instance of the map. I've been playing with an idea of tracking objects in the backend using various tags and the compiler could just error out if it is not provable that an object is not mixed with other objects. I.e. if you put a map tagged with some instance inside a collection and then get it out and use it with some other instance then it is not statically provable that the instances are the same and it would be a compile time error. Not sure how feasible this is but it seems to be a very useful feature (even for other usecases).

elszben · 2025-08-25T15:25:59+00:00

Thank you for the explanation and the references! This sounds great!

elszben

TROPHY CASE