Talk:Dragon Book (computer science)

Rename

Ideally this article should be renamed to the title of the book, and a reference should be cited for the alternative name "Dragon Book", or the information should be left out if this is not possible.

I disagree. Almost no one refers to any of the Ullman/Aho/et al compiler books by their actual titles. "The Dragon Book" is most common way of refering to them. Skaraoke (talk) 19:37, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but which is most fitting for an encyclopedia? — Loadmaster (talk) 01:18, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Within this very encyclopedia, articles about people are titled according to the name by which they are most commonly known, e.g. the article about one James Marshall Hendrix. Skaraoke (talk) 09:33, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No bootstrapping?

Surprisingly, there is no mention of bootstrapping in the 2nd edition, apart from a single cursory mention (p.425). But I believe it is still a widely used technique in compiler construction. Is it mentioned in other editions? Does it go by a different name in the 2nd edition? pgr94 (talk) 14:44, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relationship between 3 dragon books is unclear in article

The 2nd paragraph detailing the relationship between the 3 Dragon books could be a lot clearer. I would suggest something like this:

The cover iconography of a knight battling a dragon as a metaphor for dealing with the complexity of compiler design has been used on three different books:

Green Dragon: Principles of Compiler Design (1977)
Red Dragon: Compilers: Principles, Techniques and Tools 1st Edition (1986)
Purple Dragon: Compilers: Principles, Techniques and Tools 2nd Edition (2006)

Register allocation (talk) 18:24, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]