Re: Compiler implementation language preference ?

Richard <portempa@aon.at>
Sat, 10 Nov 2018 15:06:29 +0100

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Compiler implementation language preference ? nullcompiler@gmail.com (Michael Justice) (2018-05-22)
Re: Compiler implementation language preference ? marblypup@yahoo.co.uk (Bruce Mardle) (2018-05-23)
Re: Compiler implementation language preference ? w.clodius@icloud.com (2018-05-23)
Re: Compiler implementation language preference ? walter@bytecraft.com (Walter Banks) (2018-06-07)
Re: Compiler implementation language preference ? rockbrentwood@gmail.com (2018-11-09)
Re: Compiler implementation language preference ? 157-073-9834@kylheku.com (Kaz Kylheku) (2018-11-10)
Re: Compiler implementation language preference ? 157-073-9834@kylheku.com (Kaz Kylheku) (2018-11-10)
Re: Compiler implementation language preference ? portempa@aon.at (Richard) (2018-11-10)
Re: Compiler implementation language preference ? walter@bytecraft.com (Walter Banks) (2018-11-10)
Re: Compiler implementation language preference ? ibeam2000@gmail.com (Nick) (2018-11-13)
Re: Compiler implementation language preference ? aaronngray@gmail.com (Aaron Gray) (2018-12-19)
Re: Compiler implementation language preference ? sgk@REMOVEtroutmask.apl.washington.edu (steve kargl) (2018-12-19)
Re: Compiler implementation language preference ? martin@gkc.org.uk (Martin Ward) (2018-12-20)
Re: Compiler implementation language preference ? aaronngray@gmail.com (Aaron Gray) (2018-12-21)
[1 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Richard <portempa@aon.at>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2018 15:06:29 +0100
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
References: 18-05-009 18-11-001
Injection-Info: gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="74926"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com"
Keywords: design, comment
Posted-Date: 11 Nov 2018 04:40:24 EST
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.3
Content-Language: en-US

On 09.11.18 23:29, rockbrentwood@gmail.com wrote:


> A test of whether the language, itself, is worth using -- assuming it is a
> general purpose language -- is whether you'd be willing to write the compiler,
> itself, in it!


This does not prove anything about applicability of the language for
anything other than writing a similar compiler.


Richard
[Good point. Compilers use a variety of data structures and recursive algorithms
so if you can write a compiler, it's likely an adequate systems language. On
the other hand, IBM Fortran H was written in itself which only made sense because
the alternative was assembler. -John]

Post a followup to this message

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