Re: Implementation Language Choice

"Barak Zalstein" <Barak.Zalstein@ceva-dsp.com>
26 Mar 2004 22:07:19 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[10 earlier articles]
Re: Implementation Language Choice la@iki.fi (Lauri Alanko) (2004-03-02)
Re: Implementation Language Choice lex@cc.gatech.edu (Lex Spoon) (2004-03-02)
Re: Implementation Language Choice torbenm@diku.dk (2004-03-06)
Re: Implementation Language Choice bettini@dsi.unifi.it (Lorenzo Bettini) (2004-03-06)
Re: Implementation Language Choice joachim.durchholz@web.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2004-03-11)
Re: Implementation Language Choice mayan@sandbridgetech.com (Mayan) (2004-03-19)
Re: Implementation Language Choice Barak.Zalstein@ceva-dsp.com (Barak Zalstein) (2004-03-26)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: "Barak Zalstein" <Barak.Zalstein@ceva-dsp.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 26 Mar 2004 22:07:19 -0500
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 04-02-109 04-02-131 04-02-149 04-02-164 04-02-174 04-03-006
Keywords: design
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?


Barak.


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.