Mail Archives: djgpp/1997/06/02/19:36:44

From: Erik Max Francis <max AT alcyone DOT com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Interpreted languages.
Date: Mon, 02 Jun 1997 14:13:51 -0700
Organization: Alcyone Systems
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <>
References: <c=US%a=_%p=Hassler_Communic%l=DAISY-970601013014Z-334 AT daisy DOT hcst DOT com> <3391D786 DOT 46760829 AT alcyone DOT com> <5mvc21$aa9 AT nr1 DOT toronto DOT istar DOT net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

Jeff Weeks wrote:

> I agree with the first paragraph.  Some place or another the processor
> is going to have to interpret something.  You say you compile things
> into machine code... you're exactly right... machine CODE.  Code which
> must be interpreted by the processor.  The processor has to look at the
> code in memory and say, "Oh, EA... that means jump" and does a jump.
> Just because it does this blindingly fast doesn't mean it's not
> interpreted.

The reason a distinction is made between compiled and interpreted
languages is that compiled languages are faster, since they're turning
source code into a binary form native to the processor in question.

Obviously the processor executed compile machine code.  But that's missing
the purpose of the distinction is made between compiled and interpreted

       Erik Max Francis, &tSftDotIotE / email / max AT alcyone DOT com
                     Alcyone Systems /   web /
San Jose, California, United States /  icbm / 37 20 07 N  121 53 38 W
     "Covenants without the sword / are but words."
                                 / Camden

- Raw text -

  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019