From: Erik Max Francis <max AT alcyone DOT com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Demos (Was How the Quake source got out)
Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 14:01:58 -0700
Organization: Alcyone Systems
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <338F4046.53C0AC9D@alcyone.com>
References: <Pine DOT OSF DOT 3 DOT 95 DOT 970529225042 DOT 29402C-100000 AT sendit DOT sendit DOT NoDak DOT edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newton.alcyone.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Precedence: bulk

Adam wrote:

> I guess we have different definitions on interpretation...  Well, maybe
> I
> should just be more specific...  BASIC is considered an interpreted
> language, in that it interprets the actual code that you write, it
> doesn't
> compile it into something else first...  That's how interpreted
> languages
> work...  QuakeC is parsed and compiled into something that is, for all
> intentive purposes, illegible to the standard human.

Illegibility is irrelevant.  Compiled means turned into machine code which
can be executed directly by the processor.  Interpreted means that an
intervening program interprets (hence the name) commands and sends them to
the processor.

Oftentimes interpreted systems exist in a third form, usually some sort of
bytecode, and the process of turning source code into bytecode is usually
called "compilation," even though what you're left with is actually
interpreted by the runtime.

QuakeC is an example of an interpreted system.  So is Java.

In short, Bryan Murphy is absolutely correct.

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