Re: source languages, was Wrestling with phase 1 of a C compiler

Path	csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED.news.iecc.com!nerds-end
From	George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net>
Newsgroups	comp.compilers
Subject	Re: source languages, was Wrestling with phase 1 of a C compiler
Date	Wed, 14 Sep 2022 16:03:22 -0400
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Lines	28
Sender	news@iecc.com
Approved	comp.compilers@iecc.com
Message-ID	<22-09-007@comp.compilers> (permalink)
References	<22-09-001@comp.compilers> <22-09-004@comp.compilers> <22-09-005@comp.compilers>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding	8bit
Injection-Info	gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="32394"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com"
Keywords	PL/I, history, Lisp
Posted-Date	14 Sep 2022 16:26:33 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:3159

Show key headers only | View raw

On Mon, 12 Sep 2022 13:01:21 -0700 (PDT), gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu>
wrote:

>  :
>PL/I does have a powerful preprocessor, though I don't know so many
>actually using its power.   It even has preprocessor procedures, if you
>need them.
>  :

Back in the day I would have reached for Lisp ... certainly for rapid
prototyping and/or experimentation with new compilation techniques.

The trouble with Lisp in the (distant) past was the high cost of a
workstation capable of running it acceptably.  That no longer is an
issue, so Lisp can be an excellent choice for compiler development.

For various reasons I prefer Scheme over Lisp, so for a modern
"batteries-included" Scheme environment I would reach for Racket.

Certainly mileage varies, but unless you are hell bent on maximum
performance [how many people *really* derive benefit from being able
to compile 10K lines/second/core?], in my opinion almost any modern
HLL would be a better choice than C for writing a compiler.

George

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

Thread

Wrestling with phase 1 of a C compiler luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2022-09-07 09:47 -0700
  Re: Wrestling with phase 1 of a C compiler luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2022-09-09 20:47 -0700
    Re: Wrestling with phase 1 of a C compiler luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2022-09-11 20:15 -0700
  Wrestling with phase 1 of a C compiler Christopher F Clark <christopher.f.clark@compiler-resources.com> - 2022-09-12 21:45 +0300
    Re: Wrestling with phase 1 of a C compiler gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2022-09-12 13:01 -0700
      Re: Wrestling with phase 1 of a C compiler Christopher F Clark <christopher.f.clark@compiler-resources.com> - 2022-09-13 14:55 +0300
        Re: Wrestling with phase 1 of a C compiler gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2022-09-14 15:40 -0700
      Re: source languages, was Wrestling with phase 1 of a C compiler George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2022-09-14 16:03 -0400
    Re: Wrestling with phase 1 of a C compiler luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2022-09-14 14:31 -0700
      Re: Wrestling with phase 1 of a C compiler luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2022-09-15 20:11 -0700

csiph-web