Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED.news.iecc.com!nerds-end
From: OrangeFish9737 <OrangeFish9737@invalid.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Subject: Re: Which comes first, languages or compilers?
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2023 10:02:43 -0400
Organization: Compilers Central
Sender: johnl%iecc.com
Approved: comp.compilers@iecc.com
Message-ID: <23-10-013@comp.compilers>
References: <23-10-008@comp.compilers> <23-10-011@comp.compilers> <23-10-012@comp.compilers>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Injection-Info: gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="19513"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com"
Keywords: design, history, comment
Posted-Date: 30 Oct 2023 10:33:24 EDT
X-submission-address: compilers@iecc.com
X-moderator-address: compilers-request@iecc.com
X-FAQ-and-archives: http://compilers.iecc.com
In-Reply-To: <23-10-012@comp.compilers>
Xref: csiph.com comp.compilers:3540

On 2023-10-29 23:26, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
> On 10/27/23 5:57 PM, Luke A. Guest wrote:
>
>> I don't really consider any of Wirth's languages to be designed as
>> they would not have the gaping big holes they have.
>
> The *languages* are all well designed, system *libraries* are incomplete
> or missing.

I recall that Wirth also modified the language based on difficulty of
implementation, i.e. compiler and language born together.

OF
[That was certainly the case with AlgolW and PL360. -John]