Python's Performance

[Steven D'Aprano]

On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 21:00:57 +0000, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:

> 	I'd consider that BASIC to be a fully interpreted language, as the
> tokens are still a one-for-one equivalence of the source code. Python,
> UCSD, and Java are not one-for-one, so on that basis, they fit the
> definition of a compiled language... The difficulty is that the target
> architecture in not realized in hardware.
> 
> 	And then... I believe the PowerPC chipset emulated the 680xx
> instruction set, didn't it? So does that mean old 680xx Mac programs, in
> whatever the original language was, are now "interpreted languages" when
> run on the first PPC Macs (prior to a native PPC build becoming
> available)?


In case it isn't obvious by now, compiled and interpreted are fuzzy
concepts, with lots of wiggle room between them. Your compiled machine
code is interpreted by the CPU. "Compiled" versus "interpreted" are
descriptions that made more sense when there was little overlap between
the two. Once byte-code compilers running an interpreter in a virtual
machine came on the scene, the distinction became less useful.

For what it is worth, Python is compiled AND interpreted -- it compiles
byte-code which is interpreted in a virtual machine. That makes it an
compiling interpreter, or maybe an interpreting compiler, in my book.


-- 
Steven.