As someone who doesn't know better, I like your post. Can you explain 'script' ?
rac > The definitions are clear and have not changed. If you have a machine > that runs programs written in language M, but you have a program > written in language L, you can proceed in one of two ways: > > 1) You can modify the *machine* to run programs in a different language. > An interpreter is a program that transforms a machine into > another machine. > > 2) You can find an `equivalant' program in the language the machine does > run. > A compiler is a program that transforms a program into another program. > > Interpretation or compilation is a relationship between machines and programs. > It isn't a property of the language. Shriram Krishnamurthi had the most > correct > response: > The phrase "interpreted language" has no meaning; it's nonsensical. > > -- > ~jrm > > ** I suppose we could argue a little bit. If the notion of > `equivalent program' were > poorly defined, then you might find it very hard to write a compiler. > (Or, having > written one, determining if it works correctly.) It is possible to > create a programming > language that is so hard to statically analyze that the best you can do is > to `inline the interpreter'. You might call such a language an > `interpreted language'. > Scheme and Racket, however, do not fall into this category. > _________________________________________________ > For list-related administrative tasks: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
