Groups > comp.compilers > #2038

Language standards vs. implementation, was Re: A right alternative to IEEE-754's format

From	"Nick Maclaren" <nmm@wheeler.UUCP>
Newsgroups	comp.compilers
Subject	Language standards vs. implementation, was Re: A right alternative to IEEE-754's format
Date	2018-04-09 15:05 +0000
Organization	Old Fogies Society
Message-ID	<18-04-009@comp.compilers> (permalink)
References	<0d4dc7f8-1819-43e5-8082-6ff7aee5f41b@googlegroups.com> <cbebbb95-e32d-4e97-8b2f-829c38ebb66e@googlegroups.com> <pafisn$1n9t$1@gioia.aioe.org> <d315af03-75ee-4b7f-827d-4d8d3a7ae2c1@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

 [[ this string is copied from comp.arch because your moderation found it interesting ]]

In article <d315af03-75ee-4b7f-827d-4d8d3a7ae2c1@googlegroups.com>,
MitchAlsup  <MitchAlsup@netscape.net> wrote:
>On Monday, April 9, 2018 at 6:30:35 AM UTC-5, Walter Banks wrote:
>>
>> GCC tools are for the most part using old compiler technology. Some of
>> is decades old.
>
>But has there been any real advances since Oho and Ullman came out?

Yes.  But that doesn't mean that it has superseded all of the older
approaches.  Unless there is a problem with the technologies, there
is no reason to condemn their use.

Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next | Find similar

Thread

Language standards vs. implementation, was Re: A right alternative to IEEE-754's format "Nick Maclaren" <nmm@wheeler.UUCP> - 2018-04-09 15:05 +0000

csiph-web