|Dragon book getting old? firstname.lastname@example.org (2001-10-06)|
|Re: Dragon book getting old? (preety good new text book) email@example.com (2001-10-10)|
|Re: Dragon book getting old? (preety good new text book) firstname.lastname@example.org (2001-10-12)|
|Date:||6 Oct 2001 16:28:59 -0400|
|Keywords:||books, question, comment|
|Posted-Date:||06 Oct 2001 16:28:59 EDT|
Hi, I read some reviews about the Dragon Book and they mentioned that
it was 'getting old'. My question is what does 'getting old' signify?
Does it mean that it doesnt cover more recent concepts like OOP, etc
or does it also signify that the techniques presented therein for
parsers, code generators, etc are now replaced by more advanced
[Getting old means that it doesn't cover anything invented since 1976.
Everything it says is as true as it ever was. There aren't a whole
lot of new basic techniques since then (OOP was invented in 1967), but
computers now have orders of magnitude more storage than they did then
and present more complex optimization targets, so there's a certain
amount of new stuff they don't cover. But people still are writing
compilers with lex and yacc, the algorithms there haven't changed. -John]
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.