XPost: alt.folklore.computers   
   From: bowman@montana.com   
      
   On Wed, 7 Jan 2026 12:20:54 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:   
      
   > On 1/7/26 08:13, Dan Cross wrote:   
   >>   
   >> These bizarre definitional assertions about what makes something a   
   >> "compiler" or not seem to be mostly put forth by people who have never   
   >> heard of the concept of "separate compilation" or "libraries", let   
   >> alone touched the innards of a compiler.  In particular, this idea that   
   >> everything must be implemented in a single program or it's not a "true"   
   >> compiler is rooted firmly in ignorance.   
   >>   
   >>   
   > I think compilers have generated intermediate code since the first   
   > FORTRAN compiler. The only distinction is one vs. multiple programs. Wth   
   > a variety of both front- and back-ends GCC has good reason to separate   
   > them. On the other hand, a compiler that uses another compiled language   
   > as intermediate code is a strange beast, probably better called a   
   > translator.   
      
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F2c   
      
   It is a strange beast indeed. After an attempt to use it I manually   
   translated the Fortran 77 to C to get something that could be maintained   
   and extended.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)