From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,PLING_QUERY,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,b6d862eabdeb1fc4
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!noris.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Ada noob here! Is Ada widely used?
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <4bfbbdcb$0$6882$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
 <93a818e9c91ccba6d8ea3a7258ef3265@mixmaster.it>
 <4bfbdd95$0$6776$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <htgt3m$n53$1@news.eternal-september.org>
Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 19:34:43 +0200
Message-ID: <7aqxv2d9qatt.owvat4lrco20.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 25 May 2010 19:34:41 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: c4704810.newsspool4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=n:W[^h?KmHG@k=MdN::NBI4IUK<Cl32<A4Fo<]lROoRA8kF<OcfhCOKG2>67Cdc?2D[6LHn;2LCVN[<mhadbfdUKR9ii7ZMT8_OB<mjCJ1ie^H
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:11972
Date: 2010-05-25T19:34:41+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Tue, 25 May 2010 18:15:40 +0200, J-P. Rosen wrote:

> Georg Bauhaus a �crit :
>> Yes.  Ada/Ed, though, being an Ada 83 interpreter, being
>> written in SETL, not C, and being prototypical for GNAT,
>> indicates that C is not necessarily the single language for
>> writing high class compilers---as some have implied.
>> I'm sure you know that is the case for some other languages,
>> too.
> In most programming languages, there is a relation between the structure
> of the language itself and the kind of data it handles best. For this
> reason, and others like ease of porting, it is generally a good idea to
> write the compiler in its own language, safe for special cases like
> initial bootstrapping.

I don't think this is true.

1. Theoretically there is no obvious connection between the language and
the things it describes. The word "red" is not red. English grammar is not
influenced by Maxwell's equations, etc. [*]

2. Practically, is there any SQL parser written in SQL?

The languages in which a compiler can be written are in minority. Well,
AFAIK the Convey's life is Turing complete, but there never will be any
compiler in it.

P.S. I bet Ada is better for writing a C compiler than C.

* I said "no obvious", because, clearly, any language is influenced by the
way our perception functions. There is a connection, but it is not
straightforward.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de