Re: eiffel parser in SmartEiffel

llothar <llothar@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:

>
> Yes i was considering Ada but i don't know enough to write this as a
> recommendation.
>
> Indeed Ada seems to be one of the few languages still alive and
> without such an uncertain future. Also i don't know if the security
> features in Ada are not getting into the way when you write an
> interpreter where you need a lot of type unsafe casts.
Is that really needed? I doubt it. At least Pugs is written with
Haskell and I do not know if there are any esacapes from Haskells
static typesystem ;)
>
> For my work, i promised myself to never touch again a language that
> does not have a built-in garbage collection, but for low level it
> shouldn't matter.
Well I'd argue it always matter. Getting the whole dynamic memory
handling right is a challenge I do not like to solve. If one just
thinks of all the tools for finding and "fixing" memory
problems. Unfortunatly even with GC one is not safe for problems with
memory handling, they are probably even harder to spot while more
seldom. However thinking about it every time one calls some function
(oh, well who is reponsible for freeing it, is any memory handling
needed...)

I'd argue not without a reason the apache people use there pools and
the glib2 people do have their freeing functions which at least allow
to free e.g array of strings ....

Maybe one can learn a bit from those having GCs around since ages, the
Smalltalk and Common Lisp guys do not mention problems with GC all too
often these days....

Regards
Friedrich

-- 
Please remove just-for-news- to reply via e-mail.