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

Re: Compiled or Interpreted?

Expand Messages
  • bryan_davisuk
    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
    Message 1 of 3 , May 1, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      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 run
      from source code which LB dosnt do either

      The compiled/interpreted definition is an extreamly old division, and
      is probably now out of date, I dont know if domeone has added a third
      catergory yet, but I believe there are a few other languges that fall
      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 compiled
      or
      > interpreted?
      >
      > My understanding is that compiled languages run many times faster.
      >
      > Thanks,
      > Steve.
    • carlgundel
      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.
      Message 2 of 3 , May 1, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        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

        -Carl

        --- 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
        run
        > from source code which LB dosnt do either
        >
        > The compiled/interpreted definition is an extreamly old division,
        and
        > is probably now out of date, I dont know if domeone has added a
        third
        > catergory yet, but I believe there are a few other languges that
        fall
        > 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
        compiled
        > or
        > > interpreted?
        > >
        > > My understanding is that compiled languages run many times faster.
        > >
        > > Thanks,
        > > Steve.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.