language interpreters/ interpreted languages weaknesses?

[Emile van Sebille]

William Tanksley <wtanksle at dolphin.openprojects.net> wrote in message
news:slrn7stdis.pbj.wtanksle at dolphin.openprojects.net...
<snip>
> And BTW, the definition "if you can't change a running program then
it's
> compiled..." is faulty -- there are many interpreted languages you
can't
> change at runtime, and there are many Lisp compilers.
>
> >KL.
>
> --
> -William "Billy" Tanksley

I agree.  I much prefer 'interactive' now that you point it out.  I
didn't mean it as much as a definition but as an observation.  I also
agree that the line between interpretive and compiled has blurred since
compilers entering the picture to replace the days of hand compiling and
fat-fingering it in.  ;-)

It-ain't-interpretive-but-boy-was-that-interactive!-ly yr's

--

Emile van Sebille
emile at fenx.com
-------------------