Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text?

From	compilers@is-not-my.name
Newsgroups	comp.compilers
Subject	Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text?
Date	2012-04-19 16:32 +0000
Organization	Compilers Central
Message-ID	<12-04-040@comp.compilers> (permalink)
References	<12-04-019@comp.compilers> <12-04-021@comp.compilers>

Show all headers | View raw

From: Philip Herron <redbrain@nospam.gcc.gnu.org>

> I understand your squabbles with wanting a very straight forward text
> to work from. I had similar annoyances although i have a degree in
> Math and Computer science maybe that made it a little easier but i
> personally think understanding the ideas behind grammar and state
> machines etc all that theory is actually very straight forward it just
> can look obscure but it is kind of essential to know otherwise you can
> end up making a lot of mistakes without really understanding why. But
> that's not to say just taking your time to understand from first
> principles you wont get there it just would take more time.

I have an undergraduate degree in computer science as well but we didn't get
into much theoretical stuff. I went into development from there and didn't
get an advanced degree. Obviously I lack the higher academic knowledge that
many of you have. Your comments seem to confirm what I thought about this
specific issue. It's just I haven't found the right presentation and not
having anyone to discuss things with is also difficult. I don't think the
theory is silly or not relevant that's not my point at all. Given I lack the
background to understand it I'm trying for a more practical angle, that's
all.

> I personally found the Lex and Yacc o'reilly book extremely insightful
> because if you work though the bison manual the examples they give can
> really make you see how things work to a very basic level and its very
> easy to see how it can be extended very quickly.

I've looked over the archives here and John obviously knows his stuff! I'm
sure the book is very good. That sort of approach doesn't help me though
because I don't have Lex or Yacc or Bison in my development environment and
I really want to understand the parts well enough to write my own pieces and
not use something other people have written. That method has always been a
good idea in the past because I was forced to understand how the code
works. If you use other people's code you can miss things.

> Another is the dragon book i still think although there is a lot of
> obscurity in it, but Its a classic book for a reason its actually really
> really good.

I received some scans a few years ago and the book is daunting. If everyone
agrees it's good I suppose I should buy a real copy I always find reading
actual books is better than switching back and forth between screens. The
prospect of needing to understand a 1,000+ page book to do a small project
such as think I have in mind seems a bit much.

> There are a few other online pdf manuals i don't have the links for but a
> very quick search though this mailing list will turn them up. Some of them
> a very much to the point.

That's the biggest problem is how many there are and since I can't tell
which are good and which are bad I'm asking for help selecting the right one
for me. So far I haven't come across it.

> The biggest point of all is compiler and os work isn't very rewarding for
> a very long time when you start working at it. As in you can go for ages
> and ages and not feel like your getting anywhere then all of a sudden it
> can click. Well that's how i feel sometimes.

Thanks that's an important piece of information to keep handy on a project
like this. I've worked on many large products that may take years before
they go to production so I'm aware of this general idea. Writing big
software projects is not for the immediate gratification crowd!

> I hope this gives you some hope because its not the easiest subject to
> tackle. There is no substitution to just working at something just
> starting your own small basic compiler project to understand
> expressions will give you very much of what you want to know for the
> basics in my opinion and just work at that in your own time.

Thanks that's exactly what I'm after. I don't have any plans to rock
the compilation world or write books on the subject. I'd be very excited to
be able to understand the basics enough to produce something I can use and
to use that as a path to additional learning on the topic.

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

Thread

Good practical language and OS agnostic text? compilers@is-not-my.name - 2012-04-17 21:28 +0000
  Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? Philip Herron <redbrain@gcc.gnu.org> - 2012-04-18 14:25 +0100
    Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? compilers@is-not-my.name - 2012-04-19 16:32 +0000
      Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? arnold@skeeve.com (Aharon Robbins) - 2012-04-20 03:58 +0000
        Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? compilers@is-not-my.name - 2012-04-22 10:10 +0000
      Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-04-20 09:45 +0100
        Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? "Jonathan Thornburg" <jthorn@astro.indiana.edu> - 2012-04-21 15:04 +0000
  Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-18 08:39 -0700
    Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? compilers@is-not-my.name - 2012-04-19 17:32 +0000
  Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? Alain Ketterlin <alain@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr> - 2012-04-18 18:24 +0200
    Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@aol.com> - 2012-04-19 13:53 +0200
      Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? compilers@is-not-my.name - 2012-04-21 03:07 +0000
      Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-04-21 12:01 +0100
        Re: code quality, was Good practical language and OS agnostic text? Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@aol.com> - 2012-04-22 12:41 +0200
    Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? compilers@is-not-my.name - 2012-04-19 11:31 +0000
      Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? "Jonathan Thornburg" <jthorn@astro.indiana.edu> - 2012-04-20 16:19 +0000
  Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? "Derek M. Jones" <derek@knosof.co.uk> - 2012-04-18 18:16 +0100
    Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-04-18 22:43 +0000
      Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-19 00:05 -0700
      Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? compilers@is-not-my.name - 2012-04-19 11:31 +0000
    Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? compilers@is-not-my.name - 2012-04-19 16:32 +0000
  Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? compilers@is-not-my.name - 2012-04-18 19:30 +0000
    Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-04-19 18:43 +0100
  Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-04-18 20:29 +0000
    Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@aol.com> - 2012-04-19 14:20 +0200
    Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? compilers@is-not-my.name - 2012-04-19 19:05 +0000
      Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? Uli Kusterer <ulimakesacompiler@googlemail.com> - 2012-04-21 11:30 +0200
  Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? Roberto Waltman <usenet@rwaltman.com> - 2012-04-18 22:00 -0400
    Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? compilers@is-not-my.name - 2012-04-19 11:31 +0000
      Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-04-20 07:02 +0000
        Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? compilers@is-not-my.name - 2012-04-22 11:10 +0000
          Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-04-22 23:56 +0000
        Re: PL/360, was Good practical language and OS agnostic text? ArarghMail204@Arargh.com - 2012-04-24 19:13 -0500
  Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? Bakul Shah <usenet@bitblocks.com> - 2012-04-18 21:15 -0700
    Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? compilers@is-not-my.name - 2012-04-20 16:06 +0000
  Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? torbenm@diku.dk (Torben Ægidius Mogensen) - 2012-04-19 14:58 +0200
    Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? compilers@is-not-my.name - 2012-04-20 16:06 +0000
  Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? "Joe Schmo" <askmeforit@myisp.com> - 2012-04-21 02:53 -0600
    Re: Writing parsers, was Good practical language and OS agnostic text? Uli Kusterer <ulimakesacompiler@googlemail.com> - 2012-04-22 16:18 +0200
    Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? compilers@is-not-my.name - 2012-04-23 19:12 +0000
  Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? Uli Kusterer <ulimakesacompiler@googlemail.com> - 2012-04-21 11:22 +0200
    Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-21 18:58 -0700
      Re: writing interpreters, was Good practical language and OS agnostic text? Uli Kusterer <ulimakesacompiler@googlemail.com> - 2012-04-22 12:53 +0200
        Re: writing interpreters, was Good practical language and OS agnostic text? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-22 12:29 -0700
      Re: generating bytecode, was Good practical language and OS agnostic text? Uli Kusterer <ulimakesacompiler@googlemail.com> - 2012-04-22 13:12 +0200
      Re: Recursive descent parsing and optimization, was Good practical language and OS agnostic text? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-04-22 12:51 +0100
        Re: Recursive descent parsing and optimization, was Good practical language and OS agnostic text? "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2012-04-22 18:18 +0200
          Re: Recursive descent parsing and optimization, was Good practical language and OS agnostic text? "Bartc" <bartc@freeuk.com> - 2012-04-23 10:59 +0100
        Re: Recursive descent parsing and optimization, was Good practical language and OS agnostic text? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-22 13:45 -0700
    Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? compilers@is-not-my.name - 2012-04-22 22:11 +0000
      Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-04-23 18:41 +0100
  Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? basile@starynkevitch.net - 2012-05-02 22:16 -0700
    Re: Good practical language and OS agnostic text? Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@2ndquadrant.com> - 2012-06-06 16:52 +0000

csiph-web