4 ms·
I hate it that you can't see the syllabus without signing in. How is someone supposed to know whether (s)he's interested? I've looked over it, it's not too dis
by virgilp 9y ago
I hate it that you can't see the syllabus without signing in. How is someone supposed to know whether (s)he's interested?
I've looked over it, it's not too dissimilar (on surface) with what I used to teach at the university. Might not be an accident since I remember at some point we switched from our own compiler skeleton to COOL, which is apparently what Stanford uses; so maybe I inspired my syllabus from Stanford's? I forget :) (for sure I did check the syllabi of several big US universities when building mine).
Interesting that he recommends "Engineering a Compiler"; I don't doubt that it's a good book but I don't know it. The third on my list (though admittedly a bit advanced) was Muchnick's "Advanced Compiler Design and Implementation".
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- rayiner 9y agoMuchnik covers a lot of ground, so is pretty dense. Cooper & Torczon's book is more approachable, though it covers less ground. In some cases, Cooper & Torczon choose which algorithms to present because they're easier to understand. (E.g., they don't cover partitioning-based value numbering, but rather a simpler hash-based technique.)
- CalChris 9y agoMuchnick deserves a second edition. He’s retired but someone should take on the task.
- hawflakes 9y agoAs I recall, the same professor also taught a compiler class using COOL back in 1995-96 at Cal. I sat in on a session because a friend was taking it at the time.