From: Judy.Bamberger@sei.cmu.edu
Subject: Holiday Cheer ??
Date: 14 Dec 89 16:58:27 GMT [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8912141658.AA24393@fa.sei.cmu.edu> (raw)
-- A standard preprocessor would have the advantage of being standardized,
-- but would suffer the disadvantage that compiler optimizations are not
-- possible where the compiler has no knowledge of high-level semantics,
-- which is a major reason not to simply codify the preprocessing practice.
With a few substitions and a bit o' poetic license, the above could be
rephrased as:
A standard LANGUAGE would have the advantage of being standardized,
but would suffer the disadvantage that APPLICATION-SPECIFIC
IDIOMS are not possible where the LANGUAGE has no knowledge of
APPLICATION-level semantics, which is a major reason not to simply
codify the PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE.
Just somethin' to keep in mind when discussing the (de)merits of any
programming language, its features, or the abstractions it provides.
Submitted most respectfully.
next reply other threads:[~1989-12-14 16:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1989-12-14 16:58 Judy.Bamberger [this message]
1989-12-15 20:44 ` Substitutions William Thomas Wolfe, 2847
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox