5 ms·

Not taking away from the work here I think it’s very cool, but this feels a little off. This has been around since Day 1 if you are building your service applic

Not taking away from the work here I think it’s very cool, but this feels a little off. This has been around since Day 1 if you are building your service applications in C++, Rust, Zig, Swift, or Kotlin. Essentially because those languages are compiled whereas most node apps are transpiled. Someone correct me if I’m mistaken.

evan_ 4y ago
The difference is that JavaScript is an interpreted language, rather than a compiled language. Interpreted languages are distributed as source code, and an interpreter evaluates each line of code to transform it into machine language for execution on the CPU. This allows the same code to run on any CPU for which an interpreter is available. Compiled language source is transformed into machine language once, at compile time, using a compiler that understands how to turn the source code into machine language for a given environment. Once it's been compiled it generally will only work on the CPU/OS for which it was compiled. If you're going to distribute the work, you will have to compile many different versions. There are volumes written on the differences and advantages of each method. JavaScript was created as an interpreted language so that developers could write code which can be executed on any browser with a JavaScript interpreter- important for a language that is used on web pages which can be viewed on a very wide variety of devices and machine architectures. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpreter_(computing) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpreter_(computing)
- heavyset_go 4y ago
  Interpreted languages don't necessarily have to be distributed as source code, as a few of them support being compiled into byte code, which can then be distributed and interpreted.
- stewbrew 4y ago
  There is no such thing like an interpreted/compiled language - even with some kind of eval functionality. It's implementations that work as interpreters or compilers. Also, a compiler doesn't necessarily emit machine code. It could also emit byte code that is later on intepreted or compiled to something else.
  - encryptluks2 4y ago
    So computer science is wrong and you are right?
    - chrisseaton 4y ago
      No they're right - languages can be implemented with an interpreter or with a compiler or with something in between. Some require at least something in between as they have dynamic code execution. Saying 'interpreted language' is just short for 'a language that is usually interpreted'.
      - encryptluks2 4y ago
        But the difference between compiled vs interpreted languages is correct as stated.
        chrisseaton 4y ago
        The point is no language is inherently compiled - people just choose to compile it. Any language that can be compiled can also be interpreted.
        stewbrew 4y ago
        No. The language per se is neither interpreted nor compiled.
      - stewbrew 4y ago
        It's a shortcut that often isn't really useful. Also the statement about compiled languages is wrong the way it's written. The OP states: 1. Interpreted language (whatever that is) are necessarily distributed as source code and an interpreter evaluates the source code line by line. 2. Compiled languages (whatever that is) are not distributed as source code and they are necessarily transformed to machine code. Both statements are wrong as they are.
tenebrisalietum 4y ago
This is like bundling the Python interpreter with a Python script into a single executable file that runs without needing Python locally installed.
- jonwest 4y ago
  Basically—but at the same time, for an end user sometimes it’s nice just running a binary and not needing to be like “alright so in order to use this application I’m going to need to install pyenv because if I install another Python app maybe it’ll blow up my other Python apps” or something along those lines. I realize there are solutions to this, but for the average person just wanting to ship a utility without much headache, self contained is pretty compelling.

evan_ 4y ago

The difference is that JavaScript is an interpreted language, rather than a compiled language. Interpreted languages are distributed as source code, and an interpreter evaluates each line of code to transform it into machine language for execution on the CPU. This allows the same code to run on any CPU for which an interpreter is available. Compiled language source is transformed into machine language once, at compile time, using a compiler that understands how to turn the source code into machine language for a given environment. Once it's been compiled it generally will only work on the CPU/OS for which it was compiled. If you're going to distribute the work, you will have to compile many different versions. There are volumes written on the differences and advantages of each method. JavaScript was created as an interpreted language so that developers could write code which can be executed on any browser with a JavaScript interpreter- important for a language that is used on web pages which can be viewed on a very wide variety of devices and machine architectures. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpreter_(computing) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpreter_(computing)

heavyset_go 4y ago
Interpreted languages don't necessarily have to be distributed as source code, as a few of them support being compiled into byte code, which can then be distributed and interpreted.
stewbrew 4y ago
There is no such thing like an interpreted/compiled language - even with some kind of eval functionality. It's implementations that work as interpreters or compilers. Also, a compiler doesn't necessarily emit machine code. It could also emit byte code that is later on intepreted or compiled to something else.
- encryptluks2 4y ago
  So computer science is wrong and you are right?
  - chrisseaton 4y ago
    No they're right - languages can be implemented with an interpreter or with a compiler or with something in between. Some require at least something in between as they have dynamic code execution. Saying 'interpreted language' is just short for 'a language that is usually interpreted'.
    - encryptluks2 4y ago
      But the difference between compiled vs interpreted languages is correct as stated.
      - chrisseaton 4y ago
        The point is no language is inherently compiled - people just choose to compile it. Any language that can be compiled can also be interpreted.
      - stewbrew 4y ago
        No. The language per se is neither interpreted nor compiled.
    - stewbrew 4y ago
      It's a shortcut that often isn't really useful. Also the statement about compiled languages is wrong the way it's written. The OP states: 1. Interpreted language (whatever that is) are necessarily distributed as source code and an interpreter evaluates the source code line by line. 2. Compiled languages (whatever that is) are not distributed as source code and they are necessarily transformed to machine code. Both statements are wrong as they are.

tenebrisalietum 4y ago

This is like bundling the Python interpreter with a Python script into a single executable file that runs without needing Python locally installed.

jonwest 4y ago
Basically—but at the same time, for an end user sometimes it’s nice just running a binary and not needing to be like “alright so in order to use this application I’m going to need to install pyenv because if I install another Python app maybe it’ll blow up my other Python apps” or something along those lines. I realize there are solutions to this, but for the average person just wanting to ship a utility without much headache, self contained is pretty compelling.