Related articles |
---|
Re: Q: Definition of a scripting lang. lwall@netlabs.com (1995-03-27) |
Editing/storing syntax trees preston@tera.com (1995-05-28) |
Re: Editing/storing syntax trees stefan.monnier@epfl.ch (Stefan Monnier) (1995-06-05) |
Re: Editing/storing syntax trees hbaker@netcom.com (1995-06-23) |
Re: Editing/storing syntax trees daniels@cse.ogi.edu (1995-06-23) |
Re: Editing/storing syntax trees bevan@cs.man.ac.uk (1995-06-23) |
Re: Editing/storing syntax trees frode@news2.deltanet.com (Frode Odegard) (1995-06-24) |
Re: Editing/storing syntax trees hagerman@ece.cmu.edu (1995-06-24) |
Re: Editing/storing syntax trees preston@tera.com (1995-06-24) |
Re: Editing/storing syntax trees jhallen@world.std.com (1995-06-27) |
Re: Editing/storing syntax trees boggs@osage.csc.ti.com (1995-06-27) |
Re: Editing/storing syntax trees stefan.monnier@epfl.ch (Stefan Monnier) (1995-06-27) |
Re: Editing/storing syntax trees stefan.monnier@epfl.ch (Stefan Monnier) (1995-06-27) |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
From: | hagerman@ece.cmu.edu (John Hagerman) |
Keywords: | syntax, tools |
Organization: | Carnegie Mellon University |
References: | 95-04-013 95-06-022 |
Date: | Sat, 24 Jun 1995 12:07:16 GMT |
Status: | RO |
Stefan Monnier <stefan.monnier@epfl.ch> writes:
> In systems such as unix, most tools are designed to work with text,
> so it's a pain to deal with anything else than text. But if every
> tool would be designed to deal with objects, ...
Then you would have Objix? (And objixions, etc.)
Seriously, every time I work with "objects" I begin by (or end up
having to) write code to read/write a text format for debugging (at
least). How many times have the advantages of plain text been re-
discovered? One recent example: mark-up language standards.
~ John
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.