|Request comments on text. email@example.com (1987-07-02)|
|Re: Request comments on text. lm@cottage.WISC.EDU (1987-07-04)|
|Request comments on text. mason@tmsoft.UUCP (1987-07-04)|
|Re: Request comments on text. firstname.lastname@example.org (Steve Vegdahl) (1987-07-06)|
|Re: Request comments on text. ihnp4!sask!reid (1987-07-06)|
|Re: Request comments on text. email@example.com (1987-07-13)|
|Re: Request comments on text. harvard!seismo!utah-cs!shebs (1987-07-15)|
|From:||lm@cottage.WISC.EDU (Larry McVoy)|
|Date:||4 Jul 87 17:00:04 GMT|
|Organization:||U of Wisconsin CS Dept|
>[I'm not familiar with Trembley and Sorenson, but is there any particular
>reason not to use the dragon book? -John]
Yeah, there is. It's a pain to read. And it doesn't really address
the problems very well. While writing this article I looked through
the book again to see if I was inserting foot in mouth. Nope. Look up
symbol tables for a moment. Most of the information there is about
data structures i.e., hash tables and string storage. Why is this
here? It's a waste of the reader's time - anyone reading this book
will know about linked lists. And where is the info about the purpose
of the symbol table? Well, they say stuff about names and reference
counts and leave you to find out how it really works later. What about
separate compilation? Debugger support? External uses of the symbol
table (name list)? Etc, etc?
Get my point? The book is lots of theory, lots of needless information,
and not enough practical necessary information. Fisher's book is better.
Logothetis's book will be better (if he ever gets it done).
Larry McVoy firstname.lastname@example.org or uwvax!mcvoy
[Stay tuned for lots more comments on this topic. -John]
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.