| ??? 05/11/12 14:58 Read: times |
#187322 - the issue with interpreted languages is ... Responding to: ???'s previous message |
... that they are made for the ease of the programmer, letting the processor do much more work than it would do running compiled code.
I see more and more "ease of the programmer" things coming up and some of them are good (no major processor overhead resulting) and some are bad. It is sad tha many take the bad just for the "ease of the programmer" with no concern for the cost of the unit. Thus IMHO interpreted languages has no plce but "throw away code" i.e. code made for a rarely/never repeating function. Erik |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Interreted Languages - revisited | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| No Tools? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Interpreted is always problematic for complex problems | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| It's more than just syntax | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| lint isn't really a syntax checker | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Yea That | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Static code analyser | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Exception handling | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| exceptions are normally too little too late | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| the issue with interpreted languages is ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| interpreted languages are more than "throw away code" | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I hate throwing objects in the cogs, but... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Someone else responsible for compiling the interpreter | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
But the same applies to compiled languages! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Disagree | 01/01/70 00:00 |