Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!panix!.POSTED.spitfire.i.gajendra.net!not-for-mail
From: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.shell,comp.unix.programmer,comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 15:45:01 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC
Message-ID: <vebh5t$mnh$1@reader1.panix.com>
References: <uu54la$3su5b$6@dont-email.me> <ve9mrh$3aiao$2@dont-email.me> <87jzee3ded.fsf@doppelsaurus.mobileactivedefense.com> <vebffc$3n6jv$1@dont-email.me>
Injection-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 15:45:01 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader1.panix.com; posting-host="spitfire.i.gajendra.net:166.84.136.80";
	logging-data="23281"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@panix.com"
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
Originator: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross)
Bytes: 1878
Lines: 22

In article <vebffc$3n6jv$1@dont-email.me>,  <Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org> wrote:
>On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 15:47:06 +0100
>Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> boring babbled:
>>Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>> Interpreter? Perl has some kind of compiler in it, right?
>>
>>The Perl compiler turns Perl source code into a set of (that's a
>
>Does it produce a standalone binary as output? No, so its an intepreter
>not a compiler. However unlike the python interpreter its non interactive
>making it an even less attractive option these days.

That's a bad distinction.  There have been "Load and Go"
compilers in the past that have compiled and linked a program
directly into memory and executed it immediately after
compilation.  As I recall, the Waterloo FORTRAN compilers on the
IBM mainframe did, or could do, more or less this.

Saving to some sort of object image is not a necessary function
of a compiler.

	- Dan C.