Re: Compilers in six hours

hbaker@netcom.com (Henry G. Baker)
Wed, 18 May 1994 04:10:37 GMT

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
compilers, in a nutshell ellard@endor.harvard.edu (1994-05-09)
Compilers in six hours macrakis@osf.org (1994-05-12)
Re: Compilers in six hours chase@Think.COM (1994-05-17)
Re: Compilers in six hours grunwald@widget.cs.colorado.edu (1994-05-17)
Re: Compilers in six hours hbaker@netcom.com (1994-05-18)
Compilers in six hours ssimmons@convex.com (1994-05-18)
Compilers in six hours ssimmons@convex.com (1994-05-19)
Re: Compilers in six hours anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (1994-05-19)
Re: Compilers in six hours chase@Think.COM (1994-05-19)
Re: Compilers in six hours hbaker@netcom.com (1994-05-20)
Re: Compilers in six hours monnier@di.epfl.ch (Stefan Monnier) (1994-05-22)
[4 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |

Newsgroups: comp.compilers
From: hbaker@netcom.com (Henry G. Baker)
Keywords: courses
Organization: nil
References: 94-05-018 94-05-061
Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 04:10:37 GMT

chase@Think.COM (David Chase) writes:
>Reading other people's posts has tweaked a pet peeve of mine -- in many
>cases, I think a course on "compilation" would be well served by studying
>translation to Scheme, or perhaps C.


>5. In many instances, the "little languages" that people "design" have
> such disgusting syntax that the world would be a better place if they
> were replaced with Scheme (plus relevant special-purpose primitives),
> parentheses and all. I'm thinking in particular of sendmail
> configuration files and adb scripts.


Amen. (This is the LEX/YACC school of language design. If you're a
hammer, everything looks like a nail; if you have LEX/YACC, everything
deserves its own crufty idiosyncratic syntax. The Microsoft people
must derive a great deal of pleasure knowing that people all over the
world are up late at night trying to get their win.ini file to work.)


>I think a case could also be made for compilation to Postscript, though
>using a printer as a compute server seems a little silly.


>[Compiling to Postscript is a swell idea. My copy of MS Word does it to
>my documents all the time. So does dvips. -John]


Funny you should mention this. I just did an optimizing Lisp->Postscript
(well, Forth, but I had Postscript handy in my printer) compiler in a very
few pages of Common Lisp. Reference is:


Baker, H.G. Linear Logic and Permutation Stacks -- The Forth Shall Be
First. ACM Computer Architecture News 22,1 (March 1994), 34-43.


I suppose if my arm is twisted, I might make the code available.
--


Post a followup to this message

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