CPP (Re: Datalight faster than 4.2, why?)

[Rex Ballard]

In article <2600061 at ccvaxa> aglew at ccvaxa.UUCP writes:
>
>>/* Written  3:49 pm  May 28, 1986 by chris at umcp-cs.UUCP */
>>In article <2786 at utcsri.UUCP> greg at utcsri.UUCP (Gregory Smith) writes:
>>>... having a separate pre-processor will slow the compiler down
>>>considerably, but is it an advantage?????? It only gives you a
>>>certain amount of convenience in implementing the compiler.
>>
>>Not so!  There is another advantage.  The preprocessor can be used
>>alone, or in combination with programs other than the C compiler.
>>This is the `software tools' philosophy: if you can make a clean
>>conceptual break in a task, make that break programmatically; you
>>then have a set of tools that may be useful in surprising ways.
>
>Unfortunately, there is no longer a clean conceptual break between
>the C pre-processor and the compiler: `sizeof' can be used in
>pre-processor constant-expressions.
>
>I very much doubt that a cpp that parses enough of C to understand
>sizeof will be useful in non-C-related applications.
>
What? You don't have lint?, cflow?,...?

We even have a few that you've never heard of.

If CPP were integrated into the compiler, it would be bad news!

Anyone got "macro assembler pre-processors" that are 100% compatible
with DEC or Microbench (8085) and written in a portable language?
Even 80%?  (I'm serious, if you have one, send mail).

Writing the assembler is easy, but the pre-processor is a killer!

We still have to put our Vaxen in "emulation mode" (yawn) to
build for certain targets.

Conversion to m4 is progressing rather slowly, thank you :-).

Microbench is a trademark of Virtual Systems Inc.