Sun, 26 Apr 2009 11:16:51 +1200

Related articles |
---|

[4 earlier articles] |

Re: Having trouble finding texts on compiler construction. lkrupp@indra.com (Louis Krupp) (2009-04-19) |

Re: Having trouble finding texts on compiler construction. sh006d3592@blueyonder.co.uk (Stephen Horne) (2009-04-20) |

Re: Having trouble finding texts on compiler construction. jthorn@astro.indiana.edu (Jonathan Thornburg) (2009-04-20) |

Re: Having trouble finding texts on compiler construction. torbenm@pc-003.diku.dk (2009-04-21) |

Re: Having trouble finding texts on compiler construction. bear@sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) (2009-04-22) |

Re: Having trouble finding texts on compiler construction. DrDiettrich1@aol.com (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2009-04-24) |

Re: Having trouble finding texts on compiler construction. ryan.mccoskrie@gmail.com (Ryan McCoskrie) (2009-04-26) |

Re: Having trouble finding texts on compiler construction. gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2009-04-27) |

From: | Ryan McCoskrie <ryan.mccoskrie@gmail.com> |

Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |

Followup-To: | comp.compilers |

Date: | Sun, 26 Apr 2009 11:16:51 +1200 |

Organization: | albasani.net |

References: | 09-04-015 09-04-043 09-04-050 |

Keywords: | books |

Posted-Date: | 27 Apr 2009 05:54:20 EDT |

Ray Dillinger wrote:

*> Ryan McCoskrie <ryan.mccoskrie@gmail.com> writes:*

*>>*

*>> I'm trying to find some good text on compiler construction that don't*

*>> explain things in terms of visual information (trees etcetera) and*

*>> maths(which boils down to processing visual information).*

*>*

*> Boy, math is so utterly fundamental to my comprehension of the subject*

*> that I can't imagine explaining it without math.*

*>*

*> But math is also "Language" rather than "Image", at least as I experience*

*> it. It took me a few moments to think of why you might experience it as*

*> image. I'm guessing that you're having trouble with mathematical*

*> notation?*

*>*

*> Do you have trouble with the mathematical notation being too "visual"*

*> with respect to operations expressed by the relative locations and sizes*

*> of terms? If that's the case would rewriting it with some kind of*

*> text-based linear syntax (as in a programming language) help you?*

The expression of maths is done in a language like manner even if it

isn't nearly as clear as it should be. But at least from the age of

the Greek philosophers there has been a preoccupation with geometry

that permeates the field. Calculus is a very obvious example but the

way my teacher in high school explained statistics was all lines and

grids as well.

The underlying reason to this (or at least one of them) is that the

visual regions of the brain are used as a temporary buffer when doing

things as simple as arithmetic.

I tried doing a heap of multiplications in my head without forgetting

how I got to the current equation once (twice three, twice six... or

some such) and I could actually feel the interrupt when realloc failed

in my head. That's what it was like anyway.

I can follow pretty algorithms in pretty much anything Fortran-esque

so long as I know _why_ things are the way they are and I'm begining

to get my head around Lisp (though I had to find my own syntax orientated

way to learn it).

So yes linear syntax helps a great deal but the real issue is the approach

to all of this.

--

Quote of the login:

An adequate bootstrap is a contradiction in terms.

Post a followup to this message

Return to the
comp.compilers page.

Search the
comp.compilers archives again.