Re: How about in INC opcode

[Don <dr2@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

 > 
>  Hans wrote
>
> However, Perl and RPG are fundamentally different
> languages.  One is compiled and the other is
> interpreted.  Interpreted languages aren't hobbled
> by the same restraints that compiled languages
> suffer from.  Interpreted languages typically can


OK, it's been a while since I've studied compiler construction theory
here, but, since the interpretation process in effect parses and
translates the the command into some machine runnable instrucion(s), I
don't see the strength in the interpreted vs compiled line of thought
here...What am I not seeing? (caveat: I'm still only on cup 2 of coffee
this morning...:)

I would submit that if you can interpret it, you can compile it; and via
compilation you gain performance.

I would also submit HP-3000 BASIC as a good industry example...you can (or
could back a while ago) run it interactively or compile it for
performance...

Don in DC

+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---