Not least because there’s no such thing as a “compiled” or “interpreted” language.
Which is to say that it’s a property of the tooling rather than the language itself. There’s nothing stopping anyone from writing a C interpreter or a Python compiler.
Not least because there’s no such thing as a “compiled” or “interpreted” language.
I’d say there is (but the line is a bit blurry). IMHO the main distinction is the presence (and prevalence) of eval semantics in the language; if it is present, then any “compiler” would have to embed itself into the generated code, thus de-facto turning it into a bundled interpreter.
That said, the argument that interpreted languages are somehow not programming languages is stupid.
Not least because there’s no such thing as a “compiled” or “interpreted” language.
Which is to say that it’s a property of the tooling rather than the language itself. There’s nothing stopping anyone from writing a C interpreter or a Python compiler.
Except god, hopefully
I’d say there is (but the line is a bit blurry). IMHO the main distinction is the presence (and prevalence) of
evalsemantics in the language; if it is present, then any “compiler” would have to embed itself into the generated code, thus de-facto turning it into a bundled interpreter.That said, the argument that interpreted languages are somehow not programming languages is stupid.