[order fixed - please don't top-post] Stephen Kellett wrote: Christian M. Cepel > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >> I would assume that such a beast would be written in straight ansi >> c to make it available to any present or future operating system >> sporting a c compiler, as well as to make it as small and as resource >> non-intensive as possible. > C++ Surely? C is very restrictive in comparison. Writing object based > code in C is hard work (read: un-necessary extra code, and lack of type > safety) compared to C++.
Resource economy is a non-issue - it's not going to be that big and by the time it's done, any computer that will use it will be much, much bigger and faster than anything now running ABC software. > Java and C# are not worthwhile alternatives. Both quite restrictive > because nothing is truly passed as a reference (try modifying a string > object you pass in and see if it really was changed after the method > call - if it was really passed as a reference it would be). Makes > things trivial in C and C++ a real pain in Java and C#. But, things relevant to this problem? Sharing by reference is a great way to make code less maintainable, and parsers don't need to do it, ever. If they were easier to compile into libraries, SML, Haskell, Lisp or Prolog would be better options - they all have a hell of a lot of accumulated experience in use for parsing refractory syntaxes. Is this a case of "if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a folk singer"? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jack Campin: 11 Third Street, Newtongrange, Midlothian EH22 4PU; 0131 6604760 <http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack> * food intolerance data & recipes, Mac logic fonts, Scots traditional music files, and my CD-ROM "Embro, Embro". ------> off-list mail to "j-c" rather than "abc" at this site, please <------ To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
