Byters? Since the distinction between interpreters and compilers seems to be hazy sometimes, has an

[Casey Hawthorne]

Since the distinction between interpreters and compilers seems to be
hazy sometimes, has anybody proposed a third distinction?

Byters - for those programming languages that compile to byte code?
or
Pyters - since p-code (for Pascal) was the first language used in a
virtual machine?

Then there are Byter distinctions:
- those languages keeping the interpreter around - Python
- those languages that throw away the compiler - Java

 

[Oliver Wong]

Since the distinction between interpreters and compilers seems to be
hazy sometimes, has anybody proposed a third distinction?

Byters - for those programming languages that compile to byte code?
or
Pyters - since p-code (for Pascal) was the first language used in a
virtual machine?

Then there are Byter distinctions:
- those languages keeping the interpreter around - Python
- those languages that throw away the compiler - Java

The problem is that interpreted/compiled is a property of the run time
environment, not of the programming language itself. You could write a C++
interpreter, and you could write a Java compiler.

- Oliver

 

[Roedy Green]

- those languages that throw away the compiler - Java

Java does all kinds of things with the byte code, interpret, AOT. JIT,
hotspot..

 

[Paul Cager]

Since the distinction between interpreters and compilers seems to be
hazy sometimes, has anybody proposed a third distinction?

I think there is already a name for this "third way" - an "interpretive
compiler". Have a look at http://www.comsci.us/compiler/glossary/

Paul

 

[Casey Hawthorne]

I think there is already a name for this "third way" - an "interpretive
compiler". Have a look at http://www.comsci.us/compiler/glossary/

Paul

You have made my minute!






Okay!





61 seconds, in your case!