[blondin]

it puzzles me sometimes why we programmers are so fascinated by compilers, interpreters, VMs, runtimes, etc. many of these will never make it to the level of, say, a production c++ compiler or a Java VM. and yet we keep building small compilers.

[alexgmcm]

I did the Nand2Tetris course which includes building a basic compiler.

It just helps fully understand how you go from words in a file to actually doing computations and how purely abstract ideas like a 'class' are implemented.

To be fair, I studied Physics and not CS so I didn't have the opportunity to study Compilers at University.

[mywittyname]

> so I didn't have the opportunity to study Compilers at University.

Lots of CS people haven't either. My university moved compiler theory to the Masters program.

[pjmlp]

In some countries that is kind of irrelevant because most end up doing masters anyway.

[kd5bjo]

All craftsmen take an interest in their tools, and in software the tools are made with the same processes we use on a day-to-day basis. It’s the same with blacksmiths and woodworkers to varying degrees.

[conrad-mac]

Not all those who consider themselves programmers necessarily come from a CS background and so don't learn about concepts like these. To them, walkthroughs like these are fascinating.

[willvarfar]

Programmers with CS backgrounds also delight in these concepts and things.

[setr]

Is it not a rite of passage to design & implement your own language, distilling your two years of knowledge and arrogance into one pathetic failure of a design? And from then on appreciating some sense of the difficulty of constructing and maintaining such things?

Perhaps not always languages, but such experiences are vital to our industry!

[sn9]

Relevant Steve Yegge blog post: https://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/06/rich-programmer-foo...