Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Robert Klemme Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Translator, Compiler, Interpreter and Java Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 18:18:38 +0200 Lines: 28 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net BbATOKvssuyYKCTFGsa4owBmRdGsiBHXahyfSkn8UH+TgrUKc= Cancel-Lock: sha1:f2q4ifHzAHzxjUyyuC64/RZoumw= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 In-Reply-To: Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:32700 On 25.09.2015 14:36, Jeff Higgins wrote: > Giants in the computing industry may well view my explanation as the > naivety > of a simple noob, or the ranting of a stoopid troll, or the nonsense of the > ignoramus, but it satisfies me. It may even give me some satisfaction when > I look at the list of programming languages on Wikipedia and see that > one or > the other of them is declared to be interpreted or compiled. The problem with that approach is that terms are used for communication. If you create interpretations on your own and do not verify whether that interpretation is also used by others (or at least in how far it differs from other interpretations) you won't know whether you can use these terms successfully for communication - which happens to be the prime purpose of language. > To those who have or will have taken the time to respond to my request, I > thank you and appreciate your effort, but for the time being I will ignore > your explanations. Good to know - for next time when you might have a question. robert -- remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/