Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support

"Derek M. Jones" <derek@_NOSPAM_knosof.co.uk>
Wed, 11 Apr 2018 20:06:44 +0100

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[10 earlier articles]
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support genew@telus.net (Gene Wirchenko) (2018-04-10)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2018-04-10)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support 157-073-9834@kylheku.com (Kaz Kylheku) (2018-04-10)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support 157-073-9834@kylheku.com (Kaz Kylheku) (2018-04-10)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support derek@_NOSPAM_knosof.co.uk (Derek M. Jones) (2018-04-10)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support DrDiettrich1@netscape.net (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2018-04-11)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support derek@_NOSPAM_knosof.co.uk (Derek M. Jones) (2018-04-11)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support DrDiettrich1@netscape.net (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2018-04-12)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support bc@freeuk.com (bartc) (2018-04-12)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support rpw3@rpw3.org (2018-04-12)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support bc@freeuk.com (bartc) (2018-04-12)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2018-04-12)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2018-04-12)
[3 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "Derek M. Jones" <derek@_NOSPAM_knosof.co.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 20:06:44 +0100
Organization: virginmedia.com
References: <49854345-f940-e82a-5c35-35078c4189d5@gkc.org.uk> 18-03-103 18-03-042 18-03-047 18-03-075 18-03-079 18-03-101 18-04-002 18-04-003 18-04-004 18-04-026 18-04-039
Injection-Info: gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="10734"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com"
Keywords: history, design
Posted-Date: 11 Apr 2018 17:08:38 EDT
Content-Language: en-US

Hans-Peter,


>> Something like 30 languages per year get non-trivial implementations.
>
> IMO it's not so much the implementation that distinguishes languages,
> instead it's their domain and, with big projects in mind, their design
> and debug features (strict typing...).


I got my data from: http://hopl.info/ (sadly, no longer maintained).
They get their data from published papers.


There are probably hundreds of non-trivial domain specific languages
created every year. We don't get to hear about them because no paper
is published describing them.


Post a followup to this message

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