Related articles |
---|
Interpreters and (math) speed stefan.wils@zorro.ruca.ua.ac.be (1998-05-04) |
Re: Interpreters and (math) speed marlet@irisa.fr (1998-05-07) |
Re: Interpreters and (math) speed di6adag@cse.hks.se (Adam Granicz) (1998-05-07) |
Re: Interpreters and (math) speed bernecky@acm.org (Robert Bernecky) (1998-05-12) |
From: | Adam Granicz <di6adag@cse.hks.se> |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
Date: | 7 May 1998 17:03:38 -0400 |
Organization: | Chalmers University of Technology |
References: | 98-05-025 |
Keywords: | performance, interpreter |
I Don'T Know What You Mean By "Huge Number" For The Built-In Math And
Graphics Primitives, But I Certainly Like The Idea.
There Are Several Reasons Why An Interpreter Is Better Than A Compiler
In Certain Situations, And I Think Your Idea Could Be A Moderately
Great Success If The System Supported Console-Interaction, Where The
User Could Query For Some Operations, And Immediately See The
Results. And For This, An Interpreter Is Certainly Adjustable. I
Would Certainly Implement A Program That Is Capable Of Distinguishing
Between At Least A Couple Of Real Types That Could Be Used For
Variables Or Expressions. String-Support Would Be Nice Also, In Case
You Come Up With Some 3d Text Rendering Stuff, Which I Think A Lot Of
People Would Like. I Don'T Think That High Math Functions Would
Complicate Your Thing Too Much. For One Thing, As Far As I Could Tell
You Are Wanting To Design A System Where You Specify A Bunch Of
Things, And Then The Computer Draws The Output, Either In The Form Of
A Graph, A Function, An Object, Etc. All The Math Stuff Is Hidden In
Your Implementation, Unless You Let The User Specify His Or Her Own
Math Routines For Some Operations. Either Way, I Think It Would Be A
Nice Program To Work On.
adam granicz.
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.