Compiler Design Nat's Blog

Everyone who ever studied the history of the computers can notice that women's paper into this is pretty underrated and is difficult to find the actual recognition that they deserve. Grace Hopper is a clear example of this, I've never heard of her and just from this two small pieces of history that we read and watch it's clear to me that this woman was a real breakthrough for the contemporary programming. First thing to notice and that was actually impressive to me is for her getting the charge that he got, practically becoming the second in charge for it's department during the WW2, that's a reality that was reflected in movies like "Hidden Figures", where some women was just considered for the hard work in calculations, but not getting any recognition and even rejection from their own colleagues. An interesting point here is that, even with her context and the non tell histories that she must go through, it's put in evidence during the documentary ...

The article makes a quick walk trough around the process that involves the compilation, same that is reiterated that must be known by the programmers, not because of it's imperative to understand every detail of the process, but the focus of the interview in this topic goes to the notion of the base of the modern programming is on the shoulders of the compilers and it's phases. Not understanding compilers isn't bad, but it's necessary for us to know at least the bases. I found amazing the way that the interviewee talks about the GNU compiler collection as he does, showing us the effort that was made for making it the most flexible and portable, making it compatible to many of the OS, and the focus that is for giving every input as text to convert it into a generic document that will became machine code for it's executing. This reflex for us the amount and importance of the work that it's done for the actual programming languages to progress. This article the...

For me, this article seemed extremely repetitive for the things that it wanted to express, just giving more and more "examples" and over explaining the same concepts one, two or even three times, not only making it really slow, but also having us reading about how would the 100 years language would be, with the same 2 declarations. The future's language will have less "waste of time" for the programmers, and will have the least axioms for the basis of this language. One of the most interesting topics that are treated is for the programming languages not been able to evolve at the same rate that the general technology are doing. This makes a little more easy to explore the possibilities for the future 100 years, but have the issues that are described, like to not knowing if even the programming languages will still exist then. Even considering the complexity of this labor, the basis that this article takes for concluding that the way of programming it's act...