Re: Compiler Books?

vbdis@aol.com (VBDis)
31 Oct 2003 23:07:24 -0500

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Compiler Books? vicky7909@rediffmail.com (2003-10-27)
Re: Compiler Books? vbdis@aol.com (2003-10-31)
Re: Compiler Books? henry@spsystems.net (2003-11-01)
Re: Compiler Books? Parsers? napi@cs.indiana.edu (2003-11-01)
Re: Compiler Books? Parsers? napi@cs.indiana.edu (2003-11-01)
Re: Compiler Books? Parsers? henry@spsystems.net (2003-11-02)
Re: Compiler Books? Parsers? henry@spsystems.net (2003-11-08)
Re: Compiler Books? Jeffrey.Kenton@comcast.net (Jeff Kenton) (2003-11-21)
[11 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: vbdis@aol.com (VBDis)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 31 Oct 2003 23:07:24 -0500
Organization: AOL Bertelsmann Online GmbH & Co. KG http://www.germany.aol.com
References: 03-10-113
Keywords: books
Posted-Date: 31 Oct 2003 23:07:24 EST

vicky7909@rediffmail.com (v796) schreibt:


>Of the following Compiler books which are the "best" and easiest to
>read in order to implement a compiler for Pascal/C like language.


IMO top-down parsers are easier to understand than bottom-up
parsers. Even if both types can be used for C and Pascal, bottom-up
parsers are commonly described and used for C, and top-down parsers
for Pascal and other "Wirthian" languages.


If you are free in the design of the language, you may choose a Pascal
like language, for simpler implementation of the parser and
compiler. But if your language has to be somewhat compatible with C,
you have to go the harder way.


Just my opinion, comments from the community are welcome ;-)


DoDi

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.