Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

5242Re: Compiled or Interpreted?

Expand Messages
  • carlgundel
    May 1, 2002
      You've put the right spin on it. LB does have a compiler (in fact it
      has five different kinds of compilers), but not the kind that makes
      machine code EXEs. It ultimately executes your programs using a JIT
      native code compiler, similar to the way some of the fancier Java
      virtual machines do it (but in fact there is a Smalltalk virtual
      machine under the covers). It never actually stores this native
      machine code to disk, but instead an intermediate format is stored.

      LB Source->TKN file(on disk)->bytecodes in memory->native code


      --- In libertybasic@y..., "bryan_davisuk" <phoenix@e...> wrote:
      > Hm, intertesting question, compiled generally is taken to mean
      > compiled to machine code, which is something LB does not do, and I
      > dont belive that it runs at machine code speeds.
      > However, it isnt strictly interpreted either, others with more
      > experience may have a different take, but generally interpreters
      > from source code which LB dosnt do either
      > The compiled/interpreted definition is an extreamly old division,
      > is probably now out of date, I dont know if domeone has added a
      > catergory yet, but I believe there are a few other languges that
      > into this grey area, maybe enough to define a third classification.
      > --- In libertybasic@y..., "sjl_99" <sjl_99@y...> wrote:
      > > Hi,
      > >
      > > I'm still new to LB. The subject line says it all.. is LB
      > or
      > > interpreted?
      > >
      > > My understanding is that compiled languages run many times faster.
      > >
      > > Thanks,
      > > Steve.
    • Show all 3 messages in this topic