Path: csiph.com!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: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 08:45:03 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 42 Message-ID: References: <00e382b4-e046-4b84-aeda-ba718a9f19be@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 12:42:47 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="8b88f1819ae50b8afa97a5cef254b303"; logging-data="21763"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+71B6iMHcNOKxIa1YHe414ykGDFfn4ehg=" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 In-Reply-To: Cancel-Lock: sha1:JwRlYKgSgmMDEuqRp8eySL3hSQQ= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:32797 On 10/5/2015 12:24 AM, Lew wrote: > Jerry Stuckle wrote: >> The bytecode is. Show me what non-Java interpreters can interpret Java >> bytecode. > > Show us what Java interpreters can interpret JVM bytecode. Oh, and Java interpreters are quite rare; they're finally coming out with one for Java 9.Maybe. Mostly Java is compiled, so Java interpreters are hard to come by. But none of the extant ones interpret bytecode. > The JVM from Oracle, for instance. On Windows, it's called java.exe. > By the way, the term "Java bytecode" is not accurate. There is no such thing. There is JVM bytecode, which can result from compilation of Java, JavaScript, Python, Ruby, BASIC, Scala, and probably some other languages I don't know about. > RLFLMAO! > I see you are continuing your habit of insulting people personally while not answering their points. We cite facts, you insult us. I am immune to your insults, btw, so please feel free to indulge yourself in all the nasty, unimaginative name-calling and insults you please. Jerry. > I've answered your points. You're just too stoopid to read the answers. > tt won't make you right, though. In fact, it will come across as an admission that you were wrong but are unwilling to admit it. So if you insult anyone, you're admitting that you were wrong. So please, insult away. Imagine yourself the king of repartée. > > So to recap: > * There are very few Java interpreters. > * None of them interpret JVM bytecode. > * There is no such thing as "Java bytecode". > * JVM bytecode is the result of compilation of any number of languages, including the ones mentioned above, not just Java. > > Peace. > So to recap: wrong on every account. You're even more stoopid than the normal Lew. Are you sure you're the same person? -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================