I was writing a Scheme interpreter (trying to be fully R5RS compatible) and it just struck me that compiling into VM opcodes would make it faster. (Correct me if I am wrong.) I can interpret the Scheme source code in the memory, but I am stuck at understanding code generation.
My question is: What patterns will be required to generate opcodes from a parse tree, for, say, the JVM or any other VM (or even a real machine)? And what, if any, will be the complications, advantages, or disadvantage of doing so?
For Scheme there will be two major complications related to JVM.
First, JVM does not support explicit tail calls annotations, therefore you won’t be able to guarantee a proper tail recursion as required by R5RS (3.5) without resorting to an expensive mini-interpreter trick.
The second issue is with continuations support. JVM does not provide anything useful for implementing continuations, so again you’re bound to use a mini-interpreter. I.e., each CPS trivial function should return a next closure, which will be then called by an infinite mini-interpreter loop.
But still there are many interesting optimisation possibilities. I’d recommend to take a look at Bigloo (there is a relatively fast JVM backend) and Kawa. For the general compilation techniques take a look at Scheme in 90 minutes.
And still, interpretation is a viable alternative to compilation (at least on JVM, due to its severe limitations and general inefficiency). See how SISC is implemented, it is quite an interesting and innovative approach.