Compilers and languages (Was: Help reading a 9 track tape

[ben]

On 2021-08-02 5:07 p.m., Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:

> IS the specialty of the language WRITING COMPILERS?  If not, it would 
> seem that a better compiler for that language would be written in a 
> language best suited for writing compilers (strong string/text handling 
> and parsing, suitable tree structures, pattern matching, and 
> optimization,for example).  But, it seems that the specialties of 
> languages and compilers are compromised for the sake of writing a 
> compiler for writing compilers.
How many languages are defined to be simple to parse or compile.
Recursive decent parses programs nicely,but does not generate a 'correct'
parse tree with inner nodes evaluated 1st.

How about being able to bootstrap as important feature.
Simple is good too. With object oriented programming, I have no idea
just what is done at a low level.

> -- 
> Grumpy Ol' Fred             cisin at xenosoft.com

Hardware makes software interesting, or is it the other way around?
With C being developed on a PDP 11, you had no decimal operations,
but IBM had PL/I that did. Every thing was binary floating point
since then, until the latest standard of floating point for
hardware and software came out. Decimal is BACK Now things are more 
confusing than ever with operating systems changing CPU's with the 
latest marketing gimmick.

Ben.