Talk:History of compiler construction
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the History of compiler construction article.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
This article comes from an outgrown history section in the article Compiler along with older references. There appears to be enough material to create a good article although it definitely needs some work. See also . pgr94 (talk) 13:30, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
I'd agree that such an article is academically useful, although, I might add, some might belong in the Compiler article proper as still technically relevant, fostering understanding with seminal concepts. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc (talk) 15:18, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm interested in this sentence: "LR parsing can handle a larger range of languages than LL parsing, and is also better at error reporting" because from what I've learned, known, and experienced, LR parsing cannot detect exact error location because the reduce step could have more than one possibilities. It can only be "somewhere around here". Should it be corrected? Or if anyone has a proof, please tell me. Leledumbo (talk) 16:23, 08 December 2011 (UTC + 7)
Hi Leledumbo, the LR parser article states
LR parsing can handle a larger range of languages than LL parsing, and is also better at error reporting, i.e. it detects syntactic errors when the input does not conform to the grammar as soon as possible. This is in contrast to an LL(k) (or even worse, an LL(*) parser) which may defer error detection to a different branch of the grammar due to backtracking, often making errors harder to localize across disjunctions with long common prefixes.
I thought that's where this article takes the sentence from, that's why the sentence is exactly the same. Anyway, from papers I read, each author says different things depending the method he/she prefers to use, and I never one that really speaks the fact about both methods from neutral point of view. --Leledumbo (talk) 05:53, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Direct quotation of a paragraph?
Link no longer exists
This reference contains a link to a page at the Computer History Museum that no longer exists.
- <ref name="computerhistory.org">[http://www.computerhistory.org/events/lectures/cobol_06121997/index.shtml] The World's First COBOL Compilers</ref>
"Any program written in a high level programming language must be translated to object code before it can be executed" Is inconsistent with actions performed by some interpreters. Interpreters must perform similar code analysis. But translation to object code is not necessarily the result.
BNF was not used in the specification of ALGOL 58. It was first used in the specification of ALGOL 60