Re: Formally Defining a Programming Language

Path	csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.chainon-marquant.org!news-transit.tcx.org.uk!news.glorb.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.iecc.com!nerds-end
From	Christophe de Dinechin <christophe@taodyne.com>
Newsgroups	comp.compilers
Subject	Re: Formally Defining a Programming Language
Date	Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:45:45 -0800 (PST)
Organization	Compilers Central
Lines	31
Sender	news@iecc.com
Approved	comp.compilers@iecc.com
Message-ID	<11-11-047@comp.compilers> (permalink)
References	<11-11-039@comp.compilers>
NNTP-Posting-Host	news.iecc.com
X-Trace	leila.iecc.com 1322277216 41013 64.57.183.58 (26 Nov 2011 03:13:36 GMT)
X-Complaints-To	abuse@iecc.com
NNTP-Posting-Date	Sat, 26 Nov 2011 03:13:36 +0000 (UTC)
Keywords	parse, theory
Posted-Date	25 Nov 2011 22:13:36 EST
X-submission-address	compilers@iecc.com
X-moderator-address	compilers-request@iecc.com
X-FAQ-and-archives	http://compilers.iecc.com
Xref	x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.compilers:349

Show key headers only | View raw

On Nov 19, 2:45 pm, Seima Rao <seima...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> n designing my own Programming Language and given the existence
> of a lot of programming languages and an infinity of "knowhows" that
> is the Internet, I resorted to adhoc adaptation methods that worked
> incredibly well!

I'd like to share a few thoughts here, based on my experience with XL
(http://xlr.sf.net):

- Don't design a language today based on 30-years-old templates. XL
demonstrates that you can create a working, readable language with
user-extensible syntax using a recursive descent parser which is less
than 2000 lines of commented C++.

- Keep it simple. The C++ specification weights hundreds of pages, and
it's full of bugs and ambiguities. XL can be explained in twenty pages
or so, see http://xlr.sourceforge.net/sites/default/files/XLRef.pdf.

- Consider its applications, the ecosystem. Think about the library,
about meta-programming, about domain-specific languages, about IDE
integration (Eclipse, vi or emacs).


> Can readers of this forum help direct to relevant materials wrt
> Formalism that I can study to learn about Formalisms that will help in
> deciding about my Programming Language?

I assume you know about the Dragon Book (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Dragon_Book)?

Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Formally Defining a Programming Language Seima Rao <seimarao@gmail.com> - 2011-11-19 19:15 +0530
  Re: Formally Defining a Programming Language Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-11-21 17:16 +0000
    Re: Formally Defining a Programming Language "s_dubrovich@yahoo.com" <s_dubrovich@yahoo.com> - 2011-11-27 20:58 -0800
  Re: Formally Defining a Programming Language Christophe de Dinechin <christophe@taodyne.com> - 2011-11-22 20:45 -0800
  Re: Formally Defining a Programming Language federation2005@netzero.com - 2012-02-29 17:11 -0800
    Re: Formally Defining a Programming Language glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-03-02 22:35 +0000

csiph-web