Re: 'Learning Compilers': Functional vs. Imperative Host?

Jim Witte <jswitte@bloomington.in.us>
3 Apr 2004 09:10:37 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
'Learning Compilers': Functional vs. Imperative Host? jswitte@spam.bloomington.in.us (Jim Witte) (2004-03-19)
Re: 'Learning Compilers': Functional vs. Imperative Host? torbenm@diku.dk (2004-03-26)
Re: 'Learning Compilers': Functional vs. Imperative Host? jswitte@bloomington.in.us (Jim Witte) (2004-04-03)
Re: 'Learning Compilers': Functional vs. Imperative Host? jswitte@bloomington.in.us (Jim Witte) (2004-04-03)
Re: 'Learning Compilers': Functional vs. Imperative Host? jswitte@bloomington.in.us (Jim Witte) (2004-04-03)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: Jim Witte <jswitte@bloomington.in.us>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 3 Apr 2004 09:10:37 -0500
Organization: IU
References: 04-03-070
Keywords: courses
Posted-Date: 03 Apr 2004 09:10:37 EST

>lexing and parsing needs to be taught somewhere in an undergraduate curriculum
>(as it is useful for much more than compilers), but it doesn't have to be in the


    Perhaps in the Data Structures course? I'm taking DS here, and for
some reason everyone here thinks that GC and memory-alllocation needs to
be introduced in DS. Which is fine - I think now that GC should have
some place in an undergrad course sequence. I'd just rather it be put in
a separate Storage Management class, so that we could go over things in
detail instead of basically skimming, and go over more than just 3 GC
algorithms (ref counting, mark-sweep, Cheney copying collector).
Incremental and generational really should be introduced (I know nothing
about how they are implemented, just that they are used..) And DS is
really too big a topic to be stuffed into less than a semester - we're
barely going to get to AVL trees and hash tables..


Jim



Post a followup to this message

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