|New compiler and language firstname.lastname@example.org (2006-09-28)|
|Re: New compiler and language email@example.com (justncase80) (2006-10-03)|
|Re: New compiler and language firstname.lastname@example.org (Arthur J. O'Dwyer) (2006-10-04)|
|Re: New compiler and language email@example.com (stu) (2006-10-04)|
|From:||"Arthur J. O'Dwyer" <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Date:||4 Oct 2006 11:07:54 -0400|
|Organization:||Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA|
|Posted-Date:||04 Oct 2006 11:07:54 EDT|
On Tue, 3 Oct 2006, justncase80 wrote:
> email@example.com wrote:
>> Hey guys!
>> I'm new to the compiler world and I have taken my first step towards
>> creating a new compiler. I'm sure it's not the best compiler in the
>> world but it seems to be working so far. Anyway I wanted to put a link
>> out there for anybody who might be interested in checking it out (so
>> far) to see what I've been up to and maybe generate some feedback.
>> This project is sort of interesting because its a level higher than
>> "object oriented programming" languages. I'm calling it Entity Oriented
>> Programming and the language is E#. Essentially it focuses on
>> generating business objects, which isn't exactly new, but what is
>> interesting about it is that you can do it simply by writing E#. E# is
>> interesting because it focuses on Relationships and Business Rules
>> rather than data access. All generated code is template driven.
> Doh! I forgot to provide the link, sorry about that.
> [ I was wondering if you'd ever notice. -John]
(John: I was wondering whether you'd e-mailed him privately to tell
him his post was incomplete, or left it up to his perceptive abilities.
[ I wrote, but he's apparently using a forged return address. -John]
(Justn: Please try not to create Wikipedia articles /just/ to promote
a hobby project (or commercial product!) of yours. Especially if it's
something nobody else in the world knows about yet.)
Okay, now my only real on-topic comment: Justn, what's your
"language" supposed to /do/, exactly? I looked at the examples, and
what I saw was:
/demo, containing a bunch of textbook "Person HAS-A Address" stuff,
but no actual application --- i.e., no way for a person to interact
with this information. You have described a Person, but I can't create
a list of Persons, compare two Persons, or anything, right? I have to
write code in C# in order to do any programming?
Also, I noticed that since you're creating a new text file for each
"member" of your "class" (to use the OO terms), and explicitly
recording the relationships between them, your number of source files
grows as M+N and the amount of code grows as M*N. I don't understand
why this should be seen as a good thing.
/esc, containing a C# program and two of your "entity" description
files. However, the "entities" seem to be written in straight C# ---
classes with a constructor, mutator, and accessor --- and you could
more profitably have included them right in the Program.cs file
itself. (IIRC, C# is not like Java; filenames don't have to
correspond to class names.) I don't see the point of splitting up your
code like that.
And that's all I see. I haven't seen any examples of what it means
to program in an EOP language; in fact, even your Wikipedia page
doesn't tell that. If you can't use ESharp to make /programs/, then
why are you calling it a "programming" language?
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.