Re: Choosing a language for compiler design

jsa@alexandria.organon.com (Jon S Anthony)
20 Oct 1996 16:46:38 -0400

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
Choosing a language for compiler design pjmlp@students.si.fct.unl.pt (1996-10-16)
Re: Choosing a language for compiler design sestoft@ellemose.dina.kvl.dk (1996-10-18)
Re: Choosing a language for compiler design torbenm@diku.dk (1996-10-18)
Re: Choosing a language for compiler design ukcwitd@cambridge.simoco.com (Tim Wilson 6093) (1996-10-18)
Re: Choosing a language for compiler design icedancer@ibm.net (1996-10-18)
Re: Choosing a language for compiler design bmd@cs.kuleuven.ac.be (Bart Demoen) (1996-10-20)
Re: Choosing a language for compiler design jsa@alexandria.organon.com (1996-10-20)
Re: Choosing a language for compiler design jsa@alexandria.organon.com (1996-10-20)
Re: Choosing a language for compiler design joshua@intrinsa.com (Joshua Levy) (1996-10-20)
Re: Choosing a language for compiler design pbrisset@apoge.eis.enac.dgac.fr (Pascal Brisset) (1996-10-24)
Re: Choosing a language for compiler design will@ccs.neu.edu (William D Clinger) (1996-10-24)
Re: Choosing a language for compiler design rgh@shellus.com (1996-11-01)
Re: Choosing a language for compiler design geraldo@nw.com.br (1996-11-05)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: jsa@alexandria.organon.com (Jon S Anthony)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 20 Oct 1996 16:46:38 -0400
Organization: Organon Motives, Inc.
References: 96-10-075 96-10-078
Keywords: design



Our distinguished moderator added this comment:
> [Depends what your goals are. If it's maximum portability, write it in C.
> If you want to get it working quickly, write it in Lisp. -John]


sestoft@ellemose.dina.kvl.dk (Peter Sestoft) writes:
> (Standard) ML is another language for implementing a compiler fast.
> It offers algebraic datatypes and polymorphic typechecking, so you'll
> have to suffer neither the C `segmentation fault' nor the Lisp `cannot
> take car of nil' messages.
>
> In fact, one guy teaching compiler construction objected to the use of
> ML in his course on the grounds that it would make the project too
> easy.


Hmmm, if you are willing to open things up to these sorts of vehicles,
you probably should have a look at Icon (a SNOBOL successor). I've
seen in various older articles and whatnot the very comment above used
relative to SNOBOL - using it is was supposedly too easy to justify in
a compiler construction course. Certainly Icon would be even better.


/Jon


--
Jon Anthony
Organon Motives, Inc.
Belmont, MA 02178
617.484.3383
jsa@organon.com
--


Post a followup to this message

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