Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.
| Related articles |
|---|
| [10 earlier articles] |
| Re: Implementation Language Choice la@iki.fi (Lauri Alanko) (2004-03-02) |
| Re: Implementation Language Choice lex@cc.gatech.edu (Lex Spoon) (2004-03-02) |
| Re: Implementation Language Choice torbenm@diku.dk (2004-03-06) |
| Re: Implementation Language Choice bettini@dsi.unifi.it (Lorenzo Bettini) (2004-03-06) |
| Re: Implementation Language Choice joachim.durchholz@web.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2004-03-11) |
| Re: Implementation Language Choice mayan@sandbridgetech.com (Mayan) (2004-03-19) |
| Re: Implementation Language Choice Barak.Zalstein@ceva-dsp.com (Barak Zalstein) (2004-03-26) |
| From: | "Barak Zalstein" <Barak.Zalstein@ceva-dsp.com> |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| Date: | 26 Mar 2004 22:07:19 -0500 |
| Organization: | Compilers Central |
| References: | 04-02-109 04-02-131 04-02-149 04-02-164 04-02-174 04-03-006 |
| Keywords: | design |
| Posted-Date: | 26 Mar 2004 22:07:19 EST |
> Summary: if you're worrying about the language in which to write a
> compiler, you've probably got more serious problems. I've written
> about 7 serious compiler/interpreters/translators in C, LISP and
> C++, and IMO C is the best language for writing compilers.
> If I had to pick a second-best, it would probably be Ada-95.
Why not LISP? It was tried before
(http://compilers.iecc.com/comparch/article/00-10-100) and is possibly
better for concurrently handling phase ordered problems (not that I
know much about it axcept for configuring the editor). Was it the
performance, portability, or the strange data types/coding style that
drove people to other languages?
Barak.
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.