Re: Using C as an UNCOL

Daniel C Wang <dw3u+@andrew.cmu.edu>
14 Jun 1996 16:11:46 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Re: Java virtual machine as target language for C/C++ kik@zia.cray.com (1996-05-08)
Re: Java virtual machine as target language for C/C++ dw3u+@andrew.cmu.edu (Daniel C. Wang) (1996-05-27)
Re: Using C as an UNCOL toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl (Toon Moene) (1996-06-09)
Re: Using C as an UNCOL dave@occl-cam.demon.co.uk (Dave Lloyd) (1996-06-13)
Re: Using C as an UNCOL dw3u+@andrew.cmu.edu (Daniel C Wang) (1996-06-14)
Re: Using C as an UNCOL fjh@mundook.cs.mu.OZ.AU (1996-06-21)
Re: Using C as an UNCOL darius@phidani.be (Darius Blasband) (1996-06-21)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Daniel C Wang <dw3u+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 14 Jun 1996 16:11:46 -0400
Organization: Senior, Math/Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
References: 96-05-061 96-05-163 96-06-044 96-06-054
Keywords: C, UNCOL

Dave Lloyd <dave@occl-cam.demon.co.uk> writes:
{stuff deleted}
> In summary, C is sufficient as an intermediate, but it is too poor for
> high-performance compilers of larger languages.


There are lots of langauges that don't need high-performance compilers and
rather be portable. I'm personally of the opinion that for that large subset
of langauges an UNCOL that has some of the same properties that makes C good
for such a job with fixes for things that make C a pain is only a matter of
engineering. So I'm puzzled why someone hasn't done it yet. Has ANDF and
other failed attempts left such a bad taste in everyone's mouth?
--

Post a followup to this message

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