Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.compilers > #2733
| Path | csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED.news.iecc.com!nerds-end |
|---|---|
| From | Kaz Kylheku <480-992-1380@kylheku.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.compilers |
| Subject | Re: Are transpiling techniques different than compiling techniques? |
| Date | Sat, 16 Oct 2021 17:16:05 -0000 (UTC) |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Lines | 53 |
| Sender | news@iecc.com |
| Approved | comp.compilers@iecc.com |
| Message-ID | <21-10-025@comp.compilers> (permalink) |
| References | <21-10-017@comp.compilers> <21-10-018@comp.compilers> |
| Injection-Info | gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="64509"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com" |
| Keywords | translator |
| Posted-Date | 16 Oct 2021 13:47:26 EDT |
| X-submission-address | compilers@iecc.com |
| X-moderator-address | compilers-request@iecc.com |
| X-FAQ-and-archives | http://compilers.iecc.com |
| Xref | csiph.com comp.compilers:2733 |
Show key headers only | View raw
On 2021-10-11, Kartik Agaram <ak@akkartik.com> wrote: > On a slight tangent, I've never liked the term "compiler". I prefer > "translator". "Translator" maps well with "interpreter" when talking about > natural languages. That seems like a good reason to also use it for > computer languages. Back in the day of Grace Hopper working on Fortran, the terms were different from today. The "tran" in Fortran of course stands for translation. Back then, the word "coding" stood for taking a program (e.g. written by hand on paper in pseudo-code) and turning into to a machine-language computer program: among the last steps of programming. Today, we have "source code" and producing it is coding. The word "automatic coding" denoted the situation when a computer was programmed into coding: taking a higher level description of the program and trnaslating it to machine language. "Compiling" existed; that referred to something that is more like "linking" or "loading" today, or perhaps the preparation of an archive containing object files. It had the obvious meaning: sticking together routines to create a collection. Somehow "compile" came to have the meaning to include the translation step too. Perhaps because some of the steps came to be combined into one tool invocation. "To compile" is an attractive word in that it means putting stuff together, but is only used in specialized circumstances. You don't usually say that you compiled the clothes after taking them out of the dryer, or that you compiled the toppings onto the sandwich, or that many responsibilities have been compiled upon your shoulders. It's not a commonly used word. It is mostly used in the context of combining multiple published works, which is a very specific meaning. That's the big reason why it was possible to give the word a technical meaning is clear to the point that we can use "compile" almost entirely out of context (other than it being clear it's a computing context) and we know what kind of activity it refers to. "To translate" is not so: do you mean C++ to assembly, or English to German? Translating what: people translating user interfaces or docuemntation to another language? Or the machine translating something? Translate is also a term in English-language mathematics: to displace coordinates. This happens in computing: logical window-relative coordinates get translated to a pixel coordinate in the display buffer. In memory management, virtual addresses get translated to physical addresses. -- TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Are transpiling techniques different than compiling techniques? Roger L Costello <costello@mitre.org> - 2021-10-11 13:26 +0000
Re: Are transpiling techniques different than compiling techniques? Kartik Agaram <ak@akkartik.com> - 2021-10-11 11:23 -0700
Re: Are transpiling techniques different than compiling techniques? Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2021-10-12 20:05 +0200
Re: Are transpiling techniques different than compiling techniques? Kaz Kylheku <480-992-1380@kylheku.com> - 2021-10-16 17:16 +0000
Re: Are transpiling techniques different than compiling techniques? Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2021-10-16 20:22 +0000
Re: Are transpiling techniques different than compiling techniques? Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2021-10-16 23:55 +0200
Re: Are transpiling techniques different than compiling techniques? Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2021-10-17 07:02 +0200
Re: Are transpiling techniques different than compiling techniques? gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2021-10-17 15:01 -0700
Re: Are transpiling techniques different than compiling techniques? "Detlef Meyer-Eltz" <Meyer-Eltz@t-online.de> - 2021-10-12 11:34 +0200
Re: Are transpiling techniques different than compiling techniques? jan van katwijk <j.vankatwijk@gmail.com> - 2021-10-12 17:59 +0200
Re: Are transpiling techniques different than compiling techniques? Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2021-10-12 20:19 +0200
Re: Are transpiling techniques different than compiling techniques? Christopher F Clark <christopher.f.clark@compiler-resources.com> - 2021-10-14 00:33 +0300
Re: Are transpiling techniques different than compiling techniques? Kaz Kylheku <480-992-1380@kylheku.com> - 2021-10-16 17:26 +0000
Re: Are transpiling techniques different than compiling techniques? gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2021-10-17 08:37 -0700
csiph-web