3 ms·
Compilers actively translate code into a representation understandable by the machine. It just so happens that the “machine” is an abstraction of a CPU. Inter
by nobodyandproud 5y ago
Compilers actively translate code into a representation understandable by the machine.
It just so happens that the “machine” is an abstraction of a CPU.
Interpreted Javascript doesn’t fit this bill. If compiled to web assembly then it would.
- emtel 5y agoV8 compiles all JavaScript it executes to machine code. There is no interpreter included in v8.
- pjmlp 5y agohttps://v8.dev/blog/sparkplug https://v8.dev/blog/sparkplug > As we turn to improving the performance of the actual initial JavaScript execution, however, we start to hit limitations when optimising our interpreter. V8’s interpreter is highly optimised and very fast, but interpreters have inherent overheads that we can’t get rid of; things like bytecode decoding overheads or dispatch overheads that are an intrinsic part of an interpreter’s functionality.
- nobodyandproud 5y agoIgnoring templates and generics, any Turing-complete language can be compiled down to bytecode or machine code. So when developers talk about a “compiled language” they really mean if the standard tooling supports a compiler; and if programs are generally distributed already-compiled. There are implications (good and bad) to programs that are already compiled, versus a just-in-time compilation via a runtime engine; which is largely transparent to developers and end-users.