Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support

anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl)
Tue, 10 Apr 2018 16:04:17 GMT

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[3 earlier articles]
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support derek@_NOSPAM_knosof.co.uk (Derek M. Jones) (2018-04-08)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2018-04-09)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (2018-04-10)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support derek@_NOSPAM_knosof.co.uk (Derek M. Jones) (2018-04-10)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support martin@gkc.org.uk (Martin Ward) (2018-04-10)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support derek@_NOSPAM_knosof.co.uk (Derek M. Jones) (2018-04-10)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (2018-04-10)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support genew@telus.net (Gene Wirchenko) (2018-04-10)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2018-04-10)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support 157-073-9834@kylheku.com (Kaz Kylheku) (2018-04-10)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support 157-073-9834@kylheku.com (Kaz Kylheku) (2018-04-10)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support derek@_NOSPAM_knosof.co.uk (Derek M. Jones) (2018-04-10)
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support DrDiettrich1@netscape.net (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2018-04-11)
[10 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |

From: anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 16:04:17 GMT
Organization: Institut fuer Computersprachen, Technische Universitaet Wien
References: 18-04-029
Injection-Info: gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="89998"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com"
Keywords: design, history
Posted-Date: 10 Apr 2018 14:07:18 EDT

Martin Ward <martin@gkc.org.uk> writes:
>Yet, for all that complexity, "C combines the power of assembly language
>with the flexibility of assembley language"!


I wish! The C standard allows that, but does not guarantee it, so
providing that power and flexibility is a quality-of-implementation
issue. And unfortunately, at least the gcc and LLVM maintainers do
not want to provide this quality. A manifesto of this position is


http://blog.llvm.org/2011/05/what-every-c-programmer-should-know.html


my counter-position papers are:


http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/kps2015/proceedings/KPS_2015_submission_29.pdf
http://www.kps2017.uni-jena.de/proceedings/kps2017_submission_5.pdf


- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at
http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/


Post a followup to this message

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