Article View: comp.lang.misc
Article #1215Re: Cheap implementations of languages (Re: Pointers and poor implementations (was: Re: JLG's flogging ...))
From: Jim Giles
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 1990 02:26
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 1990 02:26
21 lines
1248 bytes
1248 bytes
From article <MEISSNER.90Apr11112947@curley.osf.org>, by meissner@osf.org (Michael Meissner): > [...] > No Fortran 77 is much harder to lex, and somewhat easier to parse. In > Fortran, spaces outside of hollerith constants and strings are > immaterial, which means that you must have a smart lexer, and can't > use the normal lex-type tools. The classic case is: > DO 10 I=1.15 /* Assign 1.15 to var DO10I */ > vs. > DO 10 I=1,15 /* Loop 15 times */ Hmm. Seems like I mentioned this very problem in my original 'cheap implementation' article. No, I take that back: I think my loop had some other bound than 15. If this is the extent to which Fortran is 'harder' than C, then I claim that there's no important differences at all. Lexers (even ad-hoc ones) are _easy_. J. Giles
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<14339@lambda.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think!yale!cmcl2!lanl!lambda!jlgReferences:
<MEISSNER.90Apr11112947@curley.osf.org>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think!yale!cmcl2!lanl!lambda!jlg From: jlg@lambda.UUCP (Jim Giles) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: Cheap implementations of languages (Re: Pointers and poor implementations (was: Re: JLG's flogging ...)) Message-ID: <14339@lambda.UUCP> Date: 12 Apr 90 02:26:57 GMT References: <MEISSNER.90Apr11112947@curley.osf.org> Lines: 21