Re: Languages: The Bigger the Uglier (was: Re: Aliasing in ISO C)

jgm@CS.Cornell.EDU (Gregory Morrisett) writes:


> Providing a precise semantics for a language is not just something
> for the "theoriticians" to do -- it really provides the basis for a
> language -- a contract for both the implementors and the users...


Unfortunately, such contracts work much better if they are written in
a language that the implementors and the users can understand without
calling in a specialist to interpret for them. This is why the ANSI C
committee deliberately decided against formal specifications. The
fact that much of the audience for the contract cannot read formal
specs is regrettable, but it is a fact and it will not change any time
soon.


In the real world, contracts are not written in Esperanto, despite the
theoretical advantages of doing so.
--
Henry Spencer, henry@zoo.toronto.edu
--

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