The definition of "passable compiler" in 1992 must have been very different from what it is today; while third year students write interpreters and compilers, nobody would call them useful or passable.
> Now a question: Since we're obviously thousands of times better at producing compilers than we were fifteen years ago, so much so that a single undergraduate can write a passable one in four months, why hasn't IBM invested millions of dollars and hundreds of programmer-years to produce a super FORTRAN I compiler that's thousands of times better than the FORTRAN H compiler?
The definition of "passable compiler" in 1992 must have been very different from what it is today; while third year students write interpreters and compilers, nobody would call them useful or passable.
> Now a question: Since we're obviously thousands of times better at producing compilers than we were fifteen years ago, so much so that a single undergraduate can write a passable one in four months, why hasn't IBM invested millions of dollars and hundreds of programmer-years to produce a super FORTRAN I compiler that's thousands of times better than the FORTRAN H compiler?
s/FORTRAN I/Mythos/ for the 2026 version of this.
what do you think of it?
Beautifully written. Was this a note to self. If so amazing.