Programmers must...
-
Why not make a compiler that will compile the source to an XML language instead of writing the XML? Its kind of like writing in assembly. Also I dont beleive I should know how to build a compiler to be a programmer. He just wants us to buy his book:|
static int Sqrt(int x) { if (x<0) throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(); int temp, y=0, b=0x8000, bshft=15, v=x; do { if (v>=(temp=(y<<1)+b<>=1)>0); return y; :omg:
-
Colin Meier wrote:
Ever tried writing SOAP manually?
Yes, actually.
Colin Meier wrote:
The reason the 15 million different compilers/interpreters are running around is because they're elegant solutions to specific problems. XML - as a language, not as a data exchange format - is worse than COBOL, in my opinion, and I hate COBOL.
I don't disagree with you completely here, but just something to think about: If we were talking about wheels here, would you really want 15 million different wheels for a given car? While XML solutions are not always the most elegant solution, they do provide a text-readable format that anyone who has read an XML document before can at least follow. That said, XML was not designed as a scripting language; it was designed as a data markup language. The fact that its flexibility allows for such is pretty impressive, but also makes programmers a bit lazy at times.
If you decide to become a software engineer, you are signing up to have a 1/2" piece of silicon tell you exactly how stupid you really are for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week Zac
My dislike of XML-based languages might have something to do with the fact that most of them are not imperative. I'd be much more comfortable with something like XML + Javascript...But embedding Javascript into your host app can be a bit of a pain, too - unless you're using .NET. The one nice thing about .NET is the way you can compile and run a .NET-language file quite easily from your host application. It makes adding scripting quite easy...I could easily see an "active script" pattern implementation, which lets you store data in the file using XML and code using something like C# or JScript.
Thanks Colin
-
Learning how to build compilers is, unfortunately, too difficult. The most widely used textbook, Aho, Sethi and Ullman’s “Compilers, Principles, Techniques and Tools,” is a classic example of everything that’s wrong with academic writing. Its thorough, but impenetrable, coverage of the subject offers virtually no practical information. The academicians love it, but I’d recommend avoiding the book unless you have a strong mathematical background and are interested more in the underlying math than practical application.
whew.. glad it wasn't just me. i bought that book thinking i'd like to write a little scripting language for one of my apps. i found it easier to re-invent LISP from scratch.
I agree, how many of those "academics" have written a 'real' application? I'll bet you very few, or it's mostly unix based mishmashes of borne shell scripting along with some C or C++ or whatever (maybe lisp). In the real world we write real apps. complete with the always challenging and sometimes very difficult graphical user interface, backend database server and usually client/server architecture (n-tier, 2, 3 or sometimes 4). Couple that with trying to get good project specs from end users (usually like pulling teeth out of a chicken) and now we are getting pretty close to the 'real world'. Now, add in the internet and the level of difficulty suddenly increases by an order of magnitude...
Regards, John McPherson "Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Arthur C. Clark, inventor of the telecommunications satellite