Re: Re: Perl Internals - references and symbol table

book on the fundamentals of compilers (but not the Dragon book! It sucks)

Why? Some people think that it is the "classic compiler text", what are they missing? Is this another holy war I'm not aware of?

Let me clarify that I'm not challenging you (You're writing Parrot for goodness sake.), but I like to understand differences.

Comment on Re: Re: Perl Internals - references and symbol table

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Perl Internals - references and symbol table by Elian (Parson) on Nov 17, 2002 at 03:15 UTC
The Dragon book is a classic because it was the first book in the field of any significance, not because it's actually any good. (Consider it a classic compiler book in the same way that "Plan 9 from Outer Space" is a classic SciFi movie) Everything you need for a simple compiler is in there, but you'll get it out with far more pain and confusion than the subject warrants. Newer books in the field, such as Modern Compiler Design by Grune, Bal, Jacobs & Langendoen (just off the top of my bookshelf), are much better and far easier to read.	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re: Re: Re: Perl Internals - references and symbol table
by Elian (Parson) on Nov 17, 2002 at 03:15 UTC

The Dragon book is a classic because it was the first book in the field of any significance, not because it's actually any good. (Consider it a classic compiler book in the same way that "Plan 9 from Outer Space" is a classic SciFi movie) Everything you need for a simple compiler is in there, but you'll get it out with far more pain and confusion than the subject warrants. Newer books in the field, such as Modern Compiler Design by Grune, Bal, Jacobs & Langendoen (just off the top of my bookshelf), are much better and far easier to read.

[reply]