Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!rt.uk.eu.org!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed1.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.000 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'syntax': 0.04; 'sufficient': 0.05; 'definitions': 0.07; 'strict': 0.07; '"c"': 0.09; 'interpreted': 0.09; 'mastery': 0.09; 'received:80.91': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229': 0.09; 'received:gmane.org': 0.09; 'received:list': 0.09; 'subject: [': 0.09; '"for"': 0.16; '"while"': 0.16; '>to': 0.16; 'condensed': 0.16; 'janssen': 0.16; 'lexical': 0.16; 'mapped': 0.16; 'message-id:@4ax.com': 0.16; 'received:80.91.229.3': 0.16; 'received:plane.gmane.org': 0.16; 'requested.': 0.16; 'run-time.': 0.16; 'extensions': 0.16; 'language': 0.16; 'bytes': 0.24; 'compilation': 0.24; 'tend': 0.24; 'url:home': 0.24; 'java': 0.24; 'source': 0.25; 'compiled': 0.26; 'extension': 0.26; 'header:X-Complaints-To:1': 0.27; 'instruction': 0.29; '(which': 0.31; '-0700,': 0.31; 'contrast,': 0.31; 'such.': 0.31; 'there.': 0.32; 'agreed': 0.32; 'run': 0.32; 'actual': 0.34; "i'd": 0.34; 'basic': 0.35; 'definition': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'sequence': 0.36; 'charset:us-ascii': 0.36; 'example,': 0.37; 'step': 0.37; 'architecture': 0.38; 'received:76': 0.38; 'ends': 0.38; 'mapping': 0.38; 'needed': 0.38; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'received:org': 0.40; 'face': 0.64; 'more': 0.64; '(that': 0.65; 'within': 0.65; 'processor.': 0.84; 'subject:gets': 0.84; 'universally': 0.84; 'notion': 0.91; '2013': 0.98 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: python-list@python.org From: Dennis Lee Bieber Subject: Re: Compiling vs interpreting [was Re: A certainl part of an if() structure never gets executed.] Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2013 23:13:20 -0400 Organization: IISS Elusive Unicorn References: <51bdaa78$0$29966$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: adsl-76-249-21-190.dsl.klmzmi.sbcglobal.net X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186 X-No-Archive: YES X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 30 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1371438818 news.xs4all.nl 15884 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:52829 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:48490 On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 12:31:59 -0700, Mark Janssen declaimed the following: >Careful there. This terminology is not agreed upon universally (that >is, within the realm of academia where the notion of mastery exists), >and unless you are citing an actual reference or publishing one >yourself, then you may be adding more confusion than illumination. >For example, I would say that it is an *interpreted language* that >gets compiled at run-time. Some (*valid*) definitions of "compiler" >mean a strict mapping from the language syntax and lexical definition >to a sequence of bytes that can be fed to a (hardware not virtual) >machine architecture to do perform what is requested. The face that >an extension ends in the letter "c" is not sufficient evidence, since >file extensions have no strict standard. > And I'd tend to consider it a Byte-Code Interpreted language (a la UCSD P-code Pascal). I also consider standard Java to be such. In contrast, I consider "compiled" to mean the end result of the compilation step is native instruction set for the processor. And true "interpreted" is more like classic BASIC (which /tokenized/ the program but the tokens mapped 1:1 with the source keywords. Tokenization saved a few bytes as "while" and "for" condensed to single bytes -- but then needed long subroutines at run time to actually process them. -- Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber AF6VN wlfraed@ix.netcom.com HTTP://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/