|Help on smart recompilation firstname.lastname@example.org (Clement Cheung) (1992-02-13)|
|Re: Help on smart recompilation email@example.com (1992-02-16)|
|Re: Help on smart recompilation firstname.lastname@example.org (1992-02-16)|
|Re: Help on smart recompilation email@example.com (1992-02-17)|
|Re: Help on smart recompilation firstname.lastname@example.org (1992-02-17)|
|From:||email@example.com (Brent W. Benson)|
|Keywords:||Ada, Lisp, tools, interpreter|
|Date:||Sun, 16 Feb 1992 19:50:29 -0500|
firstname.lastname@example.org (JR a.k.a. John Rogers) writes:
[interesting discussion of incremental Ada compiler based on
storing abstract syntax trees deleted]
johnro> On a million-line project, it doesn't matter how fast the
johnro> compiler is. It's better to architect things intelligently.
johnro> Using "smart recompilation" is the way to go, if you ask me.
What about interpretation? It seems to me that modern Common Lisp
systems are good at this sort of thing. Using GNU Emacs and any old
lisp I can work on a gigantic program and send any little old part to
the compiler without reloading the whole thing. Not quite as elegant
as a syntax directed editor working on abstract syntax trees, but I'd
take emacs over a syntax directed editor any day.
Brent Benson email@example.com
Department of Computer Science (603) 862-3786
University of New Hampshire
Durham, NH 03824
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.