|reoganization of free compilers posting firstname.lastname@example.org (1993-11-03)|
|From:||email@example.com (David Muir Sharnoff)|
|Organization:||Idiom Consulting / Berkeley, CA USA|
|Date:||Wed, 3 Nov 1993 08:20:19 GMT|
As you probably know, my catalog of free language tools has come back to
When Mark took it over, I knew it was too big. Now that it's back, I'm
going to do something about it.
I'm going to split it up into a whole bunch of sections. Each section
will cover one type of language. Each section will have cross-references
for those languages that aren't nice enough to fit into just one section.
I will provide an index and a table of contents (what a pain!).
I'm trying to figure out what the sections should be.
The basic idea of a section is that if you are intersted in one language
in a section, you might be interested in others.
So far I've got:
general purpose - compiled
interprters, scripting languages, and embeddable languages
prefix (lisp, scheme)
text generating (troff, tex)
Most of the languages fit into one of the catagories fairly clearly.
Some of them I'm not sure about at all.
should FORTRAN go in "math" or "general pupose"?
should my "interprters, scripting languages, and embeddable languages"
catagory be broken up? If so, what happens to perl, elk, & tcl?
what catagory whould LIFE be in?
what should I call the catagory that includes scheme and lisp?
is it fair to call basic "educational"?
should the educational catagory even exist?
loopn is a simulation language, right?
what catagory is Q in?
what catagory is self in?
who do I ask about other languages?
P.S. Does anyone want to take over maintenance of the catalog, or pay for
the maintenance? Who do I call at the NSF to ask them to pay for it?
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.