5 ms·

> Calling something a scripting language implies that you can't write a full application using it No, it means the language is interpreted instead of being com

> Calling something a scripting language implies that you can't write a full application using it No, it means the language is interpreted instead of being compiled to native code AOT.

mattfenwick 13y ago
This is specifically refuted in the article: > ‘interpreted’ and ‘compiled’ are properties of an implementation
- stefantalpalaru 13y ago
  I disagree. It's still the language that is interpreted or compiled in that specific implementation. The author is also somewhat confused by the word "compilation". Most programmers use it exclusively to talk about generation of native code ahead of time.
  - mattfenwick 13y ago
    I'm sorry, I don't think I understand the first 2 sentences of your response. They seem to say that a language and an implementation of that language are the same thing. Am I correct that this is what they mean? (Apologies if something else was meant) Say we have a language X whose definition says nothing about interpretation or compilation. We also have two implementations of language X, one which is an interpreter, and one which is a compiler. Is X an interpreted language, a compiled language, or something else? Sorry for the misunderstanding, and thanks for the clarification.
    - stefantalpalaru 13y ago
      > Is X an interpreted language, a compiled language, or something else? Both. You can take in consideration a real example: Scheme is interpreted in all its implementations and compiled in a relevant number of them. Languages and implementations are different things, but being interpreted, compiled, JIT-ed, translated, etc. is a property of the language implemented in the... implementation.
kyllo 13y ago
By your definition, Java is a "scripting language" too. I don't think anyone who's ever programmed in Java would actually consider it a scripting language.
- stefantalpalaru 13y ago
  You have a point. We need a subset of the interpreted languages. Maybe something to do with ease of use?
  - kyllo 13y ago
    I think that would be a little too squishy. For me, when most people say "scripting language" they really mean a dynamic language. Perl, Ruby, Python, JavaScript, Lisp... These are all considered "scripting" languages and the main thing they have in common is the dynamic linking and type systems. Statically typed languages like Java are generally not used for scripting purposes.
    - stefantalpalaru 13y ago
      I don't think Common Lisp is considered a scripting language, even if it's a dynamic language. Or Clojure, for that matter.
      - kyllo 13y ago
        How about emacs lisp? Would you consider that a scripting language?
        stefantalpalaru 13y ago
        When used like this, yes: http://www.leancrew.com/all-this/2008/04/emacs-lisp-as-a-scripting-language/ http://www.leancrew.com/all-this/2008/04/emacs-lisp-as-a-scr...
      - lispm 13y ago
        Some Common Lisp implementations are designed to be used as such. Example GNU CLISP. http://www.clisp.org/impnotes.html#quickstart http://www.clisp.org/impnotes.html#quickstart
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

> Calling something a scripting language implies that you can't write a full application using it No, it means the language is interpreted instead of being compiled to native code AOT.

mattfenwick 13y ago

This is specifically refuted in the article: > ‘interpreted’ and ‘compiled’ are properties of an implementation

stefantalpalaru 13y ago
I disagree. It's still the language that is interpreted or compiled in that specific implementation. The author is also somewhat confused by the word "compilation". Most programmers use it exclusively to talk about generation of native code ahead of time.
- mattfenwick 13y ago
  I'm sorry, I don't think I understand the first 2 sentences of your response. They seem to say that a language and an implementation of that language are the same thing. Am I correct that this is what they mean? (Apologies if something else was meant) Say we have a language X whose definition says nothing about interpretation or compilation. We also have two implementations of language X, one which is an interpreter, and one which is a compiler. Is X an interpreted language, a compiled language, or something else? Sorry for the misunderstanding, and thanks for the clarification.
  - stefantalpalaru 13y ago
    > Is X an interpreted language, a compiled language, or something else? Both. You can take in consideration a real example: Scheme is interpreted in all its implementations and compiled in a relevant number of them. Languages and implementations are different things, but being interpreted, compiled, JIT-ed, translated, etc. is a property of the language implemented in the... implementation.

kyllo 13y ago

By your definition, Java is a "scripting language" too. I don't think anyone who's ever programmed in Java would actually consider it a scripting language.

stefantalpalaru 13y ago
You have a point. We need a subset of the interpreted languages. Maybe something to do with ease of use?
- kyllo 13y ago
  I think that would be a little too squishy. For me, when most people say "scripting language" they really mean a dynamic language. Perl, Ruby, Python, JavaScript, Lisp... These are all considered "scripting" languages and the main thing they have in common is the dynamic linking and type systems. Statically typed languages like Java are generally not used for scripting purposes.
  - stefantalpalaru 13y ago
    I don't think Common Lisp is considered a scripting language, even if it's a dynamic language. Or Clojure, for that matter.
    - kyllo 13y ago
      How about emacs lisp? Would you consider that a scripting language?
      - stefantalpalaru 13y ago
        When used like this, yes: http://www.leancrew.com/all-this/2008/04/emacs-lisp-as-a-scripting-language/ http://www.leancrew.com/all-this/2008/04/emacs-lisp-as-a-scr...
    - lispm 13y ago
      Some Common Lisp implementations are designed to be used as such. Example GNU CLISP. http://www.clisp.org/impnotes.html#quickstart http://www.clisp.org/impnotes.html#quickstart

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]