<p>A lot has been done since 1973. But for an introduction, the earlier books should be fine.</p>
<p>For a more advanced treatment, choose a modern book, of course.</p>
<p>Another book that I like a lot is <a href="https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/0130830984" rel="nofollow noreferrer" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>On Pascal Compilers</em> by Brinch Hansen</a> from 1985. While it is written in Pascal, it is one of the true pieces of CS Literature. It restricts itself to Recursive Descent parsing which is suitable for LL(1) languages. But my view of languages is that the <em>should</em> be LL(1) for readability, though compilers might use LR techniques for efficiency.</p>
<p>So, it depends on what you need. If you are a novice at this and haven't yet built any compilers an older book might actually be superior.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-09T15:18:40.907Z
thanks for the help @Buffy
Abhishek Ghosh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-08T22:27:37.793Z
2020-07-08T22:27:37.793Z
Buffy
<p>Alfred V. Aho, Jeffrey D. Ullman have written</p>
<ul>
<li><p>The theory of parsing, translation, and compiling. Volume 1 Parsing 1972 and Volume 2 Compiling 1973</p>
</li>
<li><p>Compilers: Principles, Techniques, and Tools 2ed 2006, i.e. the dragon book.</p>
</li>
</ul>
<p>Are the two-volumn books more advanced or complete than the dragon book?</p>
<p>Is the dragon book supposed to replace the two-volumn books?</p>
<p>Are the two-volumn books outdated or still very relevant?</p>
<p>Thanks.</p>

<textbook><compiling>
The theory of parsing, translation, and compiling, v.s. Compilers: Principles, Techniques, and Tools?
# The theory of parsing, translation, and compiling, v.s. Compilers: Principles, Techniques, and Tools?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2020-07-08)

Alfred V. Aho, Jeffrey D. Ullman have written

* The theory of parsing, translation, and compiling. Volume 1 Parsing 1972 and Volume 2 Compiling 1973
* Compilers: Principles, Techniques, and Tools 2ed 2006, i.e. the dragon book.

Are the two-volumn books more advanced or complete than the dragon book?

Is the dragon book supposed to replace the two-volumn books?

Are the two-volumn books outdated or still very relevant?

Thanks.

**Tags:** textbook, compiling


---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2020-07-08. Score: 3

A lot has been done since 1973. But for an introduction, the earlier books should be fine.

For a more advanced treatment, choose a modern book, of course.

Another book that I like a lot is [*On Pascal Compilers* by Brinch Hansen](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/0130830984) from 1985. While it is written in Pascal, it is one of the true pieces of CS Literature. It restricts itself to Recursive Descent parsing which is suitable for LL(1) languages. But my view of languages is that the *should* be LL(1) for readability, though compilers might use LR techniques for efficiency.

So, it depends on what you need. If you are a novice at this and haven't yet built any compilers an older book might actually be superior.

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: thanks for the help @username_1  

---

