Re: Formally Defining a Programming Language

Path	csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!216.196.98.142.MISMATCH!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border4.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.iecc.com!nerds-end
From	"s_dubrovich@yahoo.com" <s_dubrovich@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups	comp.compilers
Subject	Re: Formally Defining a Programming Language
Date	Sun, 27 Nov 2011 20:58:37 -0800 (PST)
Organization	Compilers Central
Lines	35
Sender	news@iecc.com
Approved	comp.compilers@iecc.com
Message-ID	<11-11-062@comp.compilers> (permalink)
References	<11-11-039@comp.compilers> <11-11-044@comp.compilers>
NNTP-Posting-Host	news.iecc.com
X-Trace	leila.iecc.com 1322457160 38759 64.57.183.58 (28 Nov 2011 05:12:40 GMT)
X-Complaints-To	abuse@iecc.com
NNTP-Posting-Date	Mon, 28 Nov 2011 05:12:40 +0000 (UTC)
Keywords	design
Posted-Date	28 Nov 2011 00:12:40 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:364

Show key headers only | View raw

> >     ii) How did the designers come up with
> >         something called a "specifier"?

It is a practical need.  With a language in one hand and the need to
implement it in the other hand.
Take the identifier 'a'.  Does it represent a variable, a function, or
what?  The language syntax should help indicate which.  Let's say the
syntax indicates it is a variable.  Now comes the implementation and
use of it as a variable.  This forces consideration of the underlying
hardware which may very well handle variables of 'float' differently
than those of 'int', and that 'sign' maybe an issue in
implementation.  So to pass along more information about 'a', a meta-
term is given called "specifier".  And a need to inform the translator
about such attributes of 'a' gives rise to another meta-term
"declaration".

Section 4.  What's in a name?

C bases the interpretation of an identifier upon two attributes of the
identifier: its _storage class_ and its _type_. ...

> ...
> ROFL! The word "specifier" is just something that popped into
> someone's head, that's all.
>
> You're not going to achieve formality just by mimicing some jargon
> from C and C++.
>
> To define a language formally, you have to say exactly what is the
> structure and behavior of each construct.
>

Doesn't LISP fit this though?

Steve

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