Re: why teach about compilers, was Java compiler courses

George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> writes:


> On 29 Apr 2007 09:18:24 -0400, Karsten Nyblad
> <148f3wg02@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>>or a curse in real time programming.
>
> No. Speaking from more than a decade of experience in commercial RT
> systems, RT does not belong being taught in any CS program.


There is an interesting article here:


http://www.stsc.hill.af.mil/crosstalk/2000/08/mccormick.html


about a course in real-time systems. The project was to build some
sort of software-controlled model railroad. The course was given for
many years, and they tried using C and they tried using Ada. None of
the students using C were able to implement the minimum project
requirements, despite the fact that the instructors kept giving them
more and more code to start with -- up to 60% of the project code.
Most of the students using Ada were able to do it, despite the fact
that the instructors gave them much less code to start with (less than
20%).


> And by the way - course is spelled C O U R S E.


In some cases, curse might be more accurate. ;-)


By the way, if I were teaching a compiler course, I would use OCaml or
Ada, neither of which is perfect. I would not use C or C++, and
probably not Java. As others have said, the goal is to teach general
principles about compilers, not to waste time fooling about with
low-level debugging.


- Bob

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