Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.compilers > #1394
| From | Kartik Agaram <ak@akkartik.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.compilers |
| Subject | Re: A Plain English Compiler |
| Date | 2014-10-27 12:25 -0700 |
| Organization | Compilers Central |
| Message-ID | <14-10-009@comp.compilers> (permalink) |
| References | <06-02-122@comp.compilers> <06-02-125@comp.compilers> <14-10-005@comp.compilers> <14-10-008@comp.compilers> |
> John said (back in 2006) "You can certainly chop English down to > a small unambiguous subset, but then you've just reinvented Cobol" > > As someone who has had to work with COBOL somewhat, it is interesting > to compare the two languages: Thanks for that detail! The discussion in 2006 seemed too dismissive of this idea, and I worried that this go-around would subside similarly. Comparing all attempts at english-like pidgins to cobol seems like a cheap and overly broad shot. Hopefully now we can have a more substantive discussion. I unpacked the zipfile in the original kickstarter link ( http://www.osmosian.com/cal-3040.zip) and found the thousands of lines of punctuation-free code startlingly alien yet attractive (see attached screenshot). I had a similar reaction to the 100+ page manual written in comic sans (http://www.osmosian.com/instructions.pdf). This isn't cobol at all, and it's worth engaging with on its own terms. I wish I could play with building the sources without resorting to an untrusted .exe on a windows machine. How was the executable generated? Does each new version bootstrap using the previous one? Kartik http://akkartik.name/about [COBOL has an undeserved poor reputation largely among people who've never used it. Yes, it's wordy, deliberately so, and its faciilities for control structure are weak by modern standards, but it invented the structured data we now take for granted in languages like C and C++ and has a wider range of datatypes than most of its successors. For its time and its intended application it was a huge success. -John]
Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: A Plain English Compiler gerry.rzeppa@pobox.com - 2014-10-24 16:33 -0700
Re: A Plain English Compiler lesliedellow@gmail.com - 2014-10-25 06:01 -0700
Re: A Plain English Compiler "Derek M. Jones" <derek@knosof.co.uk> - 2014-10-25 19:51 +0100
Re: A Plain English Compiler "Gerry Rzeppa" <gerry.rzeppa@pobox.com> - 2014-10-30 14:53 -0500
Re: A Plain English Compiler Martin Ward <martin@gkc.org.uk> - 2014-10-27 11:54 +0000
Re: A Plain English Compiler Kartik Agaram <ak@akkartik.com> - 2014-10-27 12:25 -0700
Re: A Plain English Compiler Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-10-27 21:45 +0000
Re: reading and writing, was A Plain English Compiler Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2014-10-28 17:37 -0400
Re: A Plain English Compiler Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2014-10-29 01:28 +0100
Fw: A Plain English Compiler "Gerry Rzeppa" <gerry.rzeppa@pobox.com> - 2014-10-30 04:02 -0500
Re: A Plain English Compiler mac <acolvin@efunct.com> - 2014-11-03 13:15 +0000
Re: A Plain English Compiler Ivan Godard <ivan@ootbcomp.com> - 2014-10-27 15:07 -0700
Re: A Plain English Compiler Martin Ward <martin@gkc.org.uk> - 2014-10-28 15:14 +0000
Re: A Plain English Compiler Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2014-10-28 17:33 -0400
Re: A Plain English Compiler "Gerry Rzeppa" <gerry.rzeppa@pobox.com> - 2014-10-30 17:05 -0500
Re: A Plain English Compiler "Gerry Rzeppa" <gerry.rzeppa@pobox.com> - 2014-10-31 01:05 -0500
Re: A Plain English Compiler "Gerry Rzeppa" <gerry.rzeppa@pobox.com> - 2014-10-31 21:22 -0500
Fw: A Plain English Compiler "Gerry Rzeppa" <gerry.rzeppa@pobox.com> - 2014-10-30 04:01 -0500
csiph-web