Re: p-code compilers (Gene Wirchenko)
23 Jan 1999 17:31:09 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
p-code compilers (Bogomil Alexondrov) (1999-01-22)
Re: p-code compilers (1999-01-23)
Re: p-code compilers (1999-01-23)
Re: p-code compilers (Derek Ross) (1999-01-23)
Re: p-code compilers (1999-01-25)
Re: p-code compilers (Toon Moene) (1999-01-25)
Re: p-code compilers (Aaron F. Stanton) (1999-01-27)
Re: p-code compilers (1999-01-27)
Re: p-code compilers (Robert Howard) (1999-01-31)
[1 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |

From: (Gene Wirchenko)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 23 Jan 1999 17:31:09 -0500
Organization: Posted via RemarQ, - Discussions start here!
References: 99-01-078
Keywords: translator, comment

Bogomil Alexondrov <> wrote:

>Does somebody know a website focused on pseudo code compilers and
>especially possible optimizations for it. btw can a program not
>generating machine code but pseudo code be called compiler or is it a
>translator? what is the exact definition for compiler? Java is
>generating pseudo code so it must be a translator rather than

    1) Very simply. It fits the definition. (If I build a machine that
has as its instruction set the instruction set of a P-machine, does
that change the classification of previously written language
translators that generate that formerly P-code? I don't think so. To
me, it wouldn't be a useful distinction.)

    2) The ACM came up with definitions. I don't know where to go to
find them, but recall reading them some time ago.

    3) It's both.

>Thanks in advance for any help

          Are you sure you want to thank me?

          This could get into a religious war. There's a similar one on
alt.folklore.computers where someone is claiming that FORTH is an
assembly language. His argument does have it point, but it seems to
be stretching things a bit much for my comfort.

>Best Regards: Bogomil Alexandrov
>[I've never made a strong distinction between translators and compilers.
>I suppose if the output is supposed to be legible to people it's a
>translator, if it's just for computers it's a compiler. -John]

          I learned it as language translators include assemblers and


Gene Wirchenko
[One or two more messages on this topic and I'll end it, since the
definitions are clearly matters of religious preference. -John]

Post a followup to this message

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