On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, Gerald Combs wrote:
D. Hageman wrote:
Seriously, interpreted language? pfft. Big difference between python, perl, scheme, lisp, etc. and C#.
Let's see:
rufus:/home/gerald$ find /usr/lib -name *.pyc | wc -l 1453
What's the difference between a pile of modules on my system that have been precompiled for Python's bytecode interpreter and a bunch of C# modules that have been precompiled for the .NET CLI (or a bunch of Java modules precompiled for the JVM?)
I would go for the fact that you can mix and match modules compiled for the CLI as opposed to sticking to one language (theoretically).
The precompiled python modules are just a intermediary step python uses to speed things up. They don't have to exist for python to be able to work. I can't comment more on them since I can't tell you what is exactly contained in each file.
I guess the main thing for me is that I can't sit down at any command line tool and iteratively interact with an interpretor writing C#. I can't send any a command line tool a single line of C# code and get back an evaluation. I suppose you could theoretically make one, but it would be very limited in its uses.
Seriously, I do not group C# into realm of interpreted languages. I would agree that the line is blurring now that we are starting to see the compilers for interpreted languages, but one can still use those interpreted languages as a simple tool to assist in quick shell tricks.
//========================================================\ || D. Hageman [email protected] || \========================================================//