Re: Compiler and interpreter origins

beliavsky@aol.com
11 Aug 2004 12:54:25 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[4 earlier articles]
Re: Compiler and interpreter origins rbates@southwind.net (Rodney M. Bates) (2004-08-09)
Re: Compiler and interpreter origins nick.roberts@acm.org (Nick Roberts) (2004-08-09)
Re: Compiler and interpreter origins nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (2004-08-09)
Re: Compiler and interpreter origins slimick@venango.upb.pitt.edu (John Slimick) (2004-08-09)
Re: Compiler and interpreter origins Martin.Ward@durham.ac.uk (Martin Ward) (2004-08-10)
Re: Compiler and interpreter origins samiam@moorecad.com (Scott Moore) (2004-08-10)
Re: Compiler and interpreter origins beliavsky@aol.com (2004-08-11)
Re: Compiler and interpreter origins david.thompson1@worldnet.att.net (Dave Thompson) (2004-08-23)
Re: Compiler and interpreter origins jeremy.wright@microfocus.com (Jeremy Wright) (2004-08-25)
Re: Compiler and interpreter origins torbenm@diku.dk (2004-09-03)
Re: Compiler and interpreter origins gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2004-09-07)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: beliavsky@aol.com
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 11 Aug 2004 12:54:25 -0400
Organization: http://groups.google.com
References: 04-07-077 04-08-023 04-08-038
Keywords: history
Posted-Date: 11 Aug 2004 12:54:25 EDT

nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren) wrote


> >2. There was only one criterion for good vs. bad compilers:
> efficiency of >the generated code.
>
> Absolutely NOT! Certainly by the early 1960s, the concept of
> debugging compilers existed, which were expected to have thorough
> diagnostics, insert good checking and compile very fast. What
> happened to that concept, I wonder? :-(


The Lahey/Fujitsu Fortran 95 compiler is a very good debugging
compiler, when the proper compiler options are used. With other
options, it produces pretty fast code.


Post a followup to this message

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