2 ms·
By the definitions given they can not, as no function subsumes another. By whatever you define as "compiler" maybe, but I see no point in this kind of interacti
by ablob 11mo ago
By the definitions given they can not, as no function subsumes another.
By whatever you define as "compiler" maybe, but I see no point in this kind of interaction that essentially boils down to subsumtion to an entity you refuse to describe any further.
Is there a merit to this?
Can whatever you call compiler do more? Is it all three of the things mentioned combined?
Who knows - as is stands I only know that you disagree with the definitions given/proposed.
- cestith 11mo agoI think they are fine definitions. I think a transpiler, a term rewriter, an assembler, a stand-alone optimizer, and even some pretty printers are subclasses of compilers. I define a compiler as something that takes an input in a language, does transformations, and produces a transformed output in a language. All of them do that, and they are more specific terms for types of compilers.