Path: csiph.com!news.swapon.de!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Jerry Stuckle Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Translator, Compiler, Interpreter and Java Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 10:41:09 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 45 Message-ID: References: <00e382b4-e046-4b84-aeda-ba718a9f19be@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 14:38:56 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="8b88f1819ae50b8afa97a5cef254b303"; logging-data="11690"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/kn0PQfFIifKWpz1EwYO0siQInWTNWdNk=" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 In-Reply-To: <00e382b4-e046-4b84-aeda-ba718a9f19be@googlegroups.com> Cancel-Lock: sha1:FIgUYMFQR4UBONq6Q+q0PBQy2Sw= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:32781 On 10/2/2015 4:17 PM, Lew wrote: > On 9/25/2015 10:32 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >>> Languages such as Java are somewhere in between. There is a "compiler" >>> (more properly called a "translator", IMHO) which converts the source > > And yet the Java purveyors and experts all call it a "compiler". I think I'll stick with those who, as Eternal Hope pointed out, are most likely to have it right. > Just because you call a cow a horse does not make it a horse. >>> code to a byte code. But this byte code does not run natively; it > > Bytecode (one word, btw) is also not Java. > Then what is it? Can you execute a BASIC interpreter against it (many versions of BASIC can also be stored as byte code). Or Python? Or any of the other bytecode interpreters out there? If the bytecode is not Java, then any virtual machine should be able to execute it. >>> requires another program (like the jvm) to interpret the code and >>> convert it to code which can be executed by the processor. But because > > Yes, bytecode is (mostly) interpreted. Not so Java. > See above. >>> this interpretation must be performed every time the program is >>> executed, Java is considered an interpreted language. > > Java is not interpreted every time the program is run. Premise invalid. > The bytecode is. Show me what non-Java interpreters can interpret Java bytecode. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================