|[10 earlier articles]|
|Re: Implementation Language Choice firstname.lastname@example.org (Lauri Alanko) (2004-03-02)|
|Re: Implementation Language Choice email@example.com (Lex Spoon) (2004-03-02)|
|Re: Implementation Language Choice firstname.lastname@example.org (2004-03-06)|
|Re: Implementation Language Choice email@example.com (Lorenzo Bettini) (2004-03-06)|
|Re: Implementation Language Choice firstname.lastname@example.org (Joachim Durchholz) (2004-03-11)|
|Re: Implementation Language Choice email@example.com (Mayan) (2004-03-19)|
|Re: Implementation Language Choice Barak.Zalstein@ceva-dsp.com (Barak Zalstein) (2004-03-26)|
|From:||"Barak Zalstein" <Barak.Zalstein@ceva-dsp.com>|
|Date:||26 Mar 2004 22:07:19 -0500|
|References:||04-02-109 04-02-131 04-02-149 04-02-164 04-02-174 04-03-006|
|Posted-Date:||26 Mar 2004 22:07:19 EST|
> Summary: if you're worrying about the language in which to write a
> compiler, you've probably got more serious problems. I've written
> about 7 serious compiler/interpreters/translators in C, LISP and
> C++, and IMO C is the best language for writing compilers.
> If I had to pick a second-best, it would probably be Ada-95.
Why not LISP? It was tried before
(http://compilers.iecc.com/comparch/article/00-10-100) and is possibly
better for concurrently handling phase ordered problems (not that I
know much about it axcept for configuring the editor). Was it the
performance, portability, or the strange data types/coding style that
drove people to other languages?
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.