Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.compilers > #3040
| From | Christopher F Clark <christopher.f.clark@compiler-resources.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.compilers |
| Subject | RE: Are there compiler generators? |
| Date | 2022-06-01 14:07 +0300 |
| Organization | Compilers Central |
| Message-ID | <22-06-002@comp.compilers> (permalink) |
| References | <22-05-054@comp.compilers> <22-05-058@comp.compilers> <22-05-063@comp.compilers> <22-05-065@comp.compilers> <22-05-066@comp.compilers> |
Although there are many wonderful examples in replies already. I want to mention the Eli "system" http://eli-project.sourceforge.net/ It was (is) an attempt to do exactly that. It did so by cobbling together different tools that different parts of a compiler. One in particular is worth mentioning (Oil) which handled static type systems and which types were compatible and when coercions were applicable. I never found the overall system to be that usable because it didn't really unify the tools to work well together, so that the notations tended to stay divergent. In fact, that is partially why in our (Compiler Resources) version of Yacc++ we integrated the lexer and used Yacc-like notation for it. We actually did it, because using one notation simply makes sense, but seeing a tool which used multiple non-integrated notations simply reinforced that opinion. ----- But, the main point is that compilers are a big area with lots of little parts, some of them have tools and others don't. More importantly, much of the development in compilers since 1991 has been in hand-written parts. I don't think there is a single production quality compiler for C++ using anything but a hard-written parser. That to me is a shame. What we have instead of tools are more "frameworks" e.g. gcc and the gnu-compiler-collection, CLANG, even the MIPS suite (Chow's work). LLVM (and possiblu MLIR) are bright spots that the trend might be reversing. It's a pendulum, swinging one way than the other. ------ And finally to Dr Dietrich's and our moderators point. I think that compilers hand-written or tool generated are all appropriate, including things like TeX and HTML etc. That would also include IDEs. However, AI systems that aren't self explanatory and which we don't know exactly what they recognize are probably not. That's a different technology. Fortunately, it sounds like there are AI researchers attempting to make AI systems that do "explain" what their reasoning is. I might include them especially if they help us advance our own understanding. The following article talks about it: https://www.quantamagazine.org/machine-scientists-distill-the-laws-of-physics-from-raw-data-20220510/ ------ Sorry, that I glommed three replies into one. It's just that I am still in a rush to get some software finished for my "day" job (despite having once retired but then un-retired to do interesting stuff and some not so interesting) and taking time to write these replies definitely impacts that. Best regards, Chris -- ****************************************************************************** Chris Clark email: christopher.f.clark@compiler-resources.com Compiler Resources, Inc. Web Site: http://world.std.com/~compres 23 Bailey Rd voice: (508) 435-5016 Berlin, MA 01503 USA twitter: @intel_chris ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Are there "compiler generators"? Roger L Costello <costello@mitre.org> - 2022-05-28 22:27 +0000
Re: Are there "compiler generators"? "Robin Vowels" <robin51@dodo.com.au> - 2022-05-29 13:34 +1000
Re: Are there "compiler generators"? Jan Ziak <0xe2.0x9a.0x9b@gmail.com> - 2022-05-28 23:52 -0700
Re: Are there "compiler generators"? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2022-05-29 06:45 +0000
Re: Are there "compiler generators"? Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2022-05-29 09:14 +0000
Re: Are there "compiler generators"? Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2022-05-30 14:53 +0200
Re: Are there "compiler generators"? Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2022-05-31 12:57 +0200
Re: Are there "compiler generators"? gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2022-05-31 16:55 -0700
RE: Are there compiler generators? Christopher F Clark <christopher.f.clark@compiler-resources.com> - 2022-06-01 14:07 +0300
Re: Are there "compiler generators"? Martin Ward <martin@gkc.org.uk> - 2022-05-29 12:00 +0100
Re: Are there "compiler generators"? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2022-05-30 07:35 +0000
Re: Are there "compiler generators"? Fernando <pronesto@gmail.com> - 2022-05-29 05:00 -0700
Re: Are there "compiler generators"? gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2022-05-29 23:29 -0700
Re: Are there "compiler generators"? mac <acolvin@efunct.com> - 2022-06-09 14:12 +0000
Re: Are there "compiler generators"? Kaz Kylheku <480-992-1380@kylheku.com> - 2022-05-30 20:20 +0000
csiph-web