Re: Newbie question: What is the importance for a compiler to be able to compile itself?

Jeremy Wright <jeremy.wright@microfocus.com>
Wed, 20 May 2009 08:34:33 +0000 (UTC)

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[3 earlier articles]
Re: Newbie question: What is the importance for a compiler to be able DrDiettrich1@aol.com (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2009-05-19)
Re: Newbie question: What is the importance for a compiler to be able rose@acm.org (Ken Rose) (2009-05-19)
Re: Newbie question: What is the importance for a compiler to be able gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2009-05-19)
Re: Newbie question: What is the importance for a compiler to be able gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2009-05-19)
Re: Newbie question: What is the importance for a compiler to be able kenney@cix.compulink.co.uk (2009-05-19)
Re: Newbie question: What is the importance for a compiler to be able pertti.kellomaki@tut.fi (Pertti Kellomaki) (2009-05-20)
Re: Newbie question: What is the importance for a compiler to be able jeremy.wright@microfocus.com (Jeremy Wright) (2009-05-20)
Re: Newbie question: What is the importance for a compiler to be able torbenm@pc-003.diku.dk (2009-05-20)
Re: Newbie question: What is the importance for a compiler to be able armencho@gmail.com (2009-05-20)
Re: Newbie question: What is the importance for a compiler to be able marcov@snail.stack.nl (Marco van de Voort) (2009-05-20)
Re: Newbie question: What is the importance for a compiler to be able jeremy.wright@microfocus.com (Jeremy Wright) (2009-05-20)
Re: Newbie question: What is the importance for a compiler to be able DrDiettrich1@aol.com (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2009-05-20)
Re: Newbie question: What is the importance for a compiler to be able blog@rivadpm.com (alextangent) (2009-05-21)
[1 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |

From: Jeremy Wright <jeremy.wright@microfocus.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 08:34:33 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 09-05-084
Keywords: practice
Posted-Date: 20 May 2009 10:00:28 EDT

> Hans-Peter wrote:
>
> You'll find out when you want to port your compiler to a new platform.
> If it doesn't support the language you wrote your compiler in, or that
> other compiler there doesn't behave as expected, you're almost lost.


You can turn this around, and make it an argument against
self-residency in the compiler. There is a danger that you come to
rely on non-standard extensions to the language, and worse : implicit
non-standard extensions to the semantic definition of the language.


For instance : your compiler may always evaluate sub-expressions with
side effects left to right. Your compiler may come to rely on that. If
new optimizations are introduced which change this, suddenly the
compiler does not work. If your compiler is reguarly compiled by
several different compilers, there is less chance of such assumptions
becoming ingrained.


Not a technical objection per se, but self residency may encourage the
compiler writer to add extensions to support compiler type programs,
and add optimizations to support the same. This may come as a shock to
some people on this forum, but most applications are not compilers :-)


Jeremy



Post a followup to this message

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