Related articles |
---|
[9 earlier articles] |
Re: static estimation of conditional branches? idacrd!desj@uunet.UU.NET (1992-12-12) |
Re: static estimation of conditional branches? jfisher@hplabsz.hpl.hp.com (1992-12-11) |
Re: static estimation of conditional branches? chased@rbbb.Eng.Sun.COM (1992-12-12) |
Re: static estimation of conditional branches? glew@pdx007.intel.com (1992-12-12) |
Re: static estimation of conditional branches? henry@zoo.toronto.edu (1992-12-13) |
Re: static estimation of conditional branches? hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (1992-12-13) |
Re: static estimation of conditional branches? drw@euclid.mit.edu (1992-12-14) |
Re: static estimation of conditional branches? idacrd!desj@uunet.UU.NET (1992-12-14) |
Re: static estimation of conditional branches? iwm@doc.ic.ac.uk (1992-12-14) |
Re: static estimation of conditional branches? pcg@aber.ac.uk (1992-12-15) |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
From: | drw@euclid.mit.edu (Dale R. Worley) |
Organization: | MIT Dept. of Tetrapilotomy, Cambridge, MA, USA |
Date: | Mon, 14 Dec 1992 04:41:01 GMT |
Keywords: | design |
References: | 92-12-029 92-12-055 |
hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
One should not design a language, or a compiler, so that a fool can use it
"properly." In that case, it is quite likely that nobody can use it at a
higher level than the fool. Design it for the genius first, and then put
in the cautions, etc., for the fool.
Perhaps your view is based on your field (numerical analysis). Numerical
analysis tends to be done mostly by geniuses, because the fools quickly
wash out. In the rest of the software world, geniuses are 1% or less of
the population, because fools can get more-or-less useful work done. Read
comp.lang.c if you want to know what the real world is like. Ugh!
Dale
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.