appreciate

Linguistics and Compilers
But, for most engineers, compilers are simply mind tools. Our minds are too limited
to write complicated programs that do things like GEM, Windows, or D-Base without
them. Compilers make programs that computers understand from programs that
people understand. They are sort of like natural language translators who sit in a
business conference and make English into Japanese.
The UW bought a new computer. It was a Burroughs B5500. This computer, an offshoot
of the English Electric KDF-9, was unique. It was designed to run ALGOL
(ALGOL stands for Algorithmic Language, an improvement over FORTRAN, and
the precursor of today's Pascal language).
The B5500, although today severly outdated, is a "stack machine." That means that
data is held in temporary memory that is built and discarded as its program runs
(that's the way the "C" programming language works today). The B5500 and
ALGOL were the basis for compiler design at Stanford University and the model
for Bill McKeeman's work on XPL. And, XPL led to Intel's "defacto standard processor."
During my graduate studies, I used Bill McKeeman's XPL. It was called a compiler-compiler.
XPL is a program that makes compilers. What you do is plug-in
rules of syntax, much like grammar rules of English but constrained to the rigidity
of computer languages.
Linguistics and Compilers
For me, linguistics was only word phrase games, like the word "wind" that can
mean a stiff breeze, or what you do to your watch to make it keep time. (No, don't
answer with "I change the battery." I'm talking about the old windup kind, Jeez.)
Noam Chomsky was a well-known Linguist who helped define the difference
between "syntax" and "semantics" in natural language through his work on "Transformational
Grammar." He studied natural language by allowing for sentences like
this.
"He broke the window with his little sister"
(and, I always liked this next one)
"He fed her dog biscuits"
Computer Connections 17