All languages have specific design criteria, a goal in mind.

Note: More is better, to a point, don’t wander in your explanations, but supply enough detail to show you understand the question.

  1. All languages have specific design criteria, a goal in mind. .
  1. Give two languages that are in direct conflict with each.
    1. Provide examples of these conflicts as either programming examples (features allowed or not allowed) or program model, (environment).
    1. Compare and contrast the terms readability and writeability regarding your selected two languages, and explain why you believe this is so.
  • As languages evolve, describe some of the restrictions that you believe are appropriate for changes in programming languages. Describe, in your opinion, the goal of program language evolution should be.
  • In chapter 3, we discussed syntax and semantics, in general there are two types of grammars for programming languages, regular and context-free, what is the difference, what is the scope (where are they applied), and how can the use of these grammars produce a higher level of program reliability. Does this higher level of reliability encourage complexity?
  • Describe the different types of Semantics, when and how are they applied, what are the advantages or disadvantages to each type.
  • Explain why compilers use parsing algorithms that work on only a subset of all grammars.
  • Make an argument, which type of parser is more powerful, bottom-up or top down, use as may examples as possible to support your side.
  • What is a variable, and why don’t functional languages have them.
  • What are implicit heap-dynamic variables, when, how and why are they used, when should they not be used.
  • What is dynamic scoping, when and where it is applied, what are the performance impacts of using dynamic scoping and how can these be minimized.
  1. Explain the advantages and disadvantages of user-defined ordinal types as data types? What are the advantages and disadvantages to an associative array?
  1. Make an argument that narrowing or widening conversions are never safe or are safe, support your claim with examples.