Is Python "Compiled"?

[Zac Jensen]

I'd have to say, use Java... then Use Jython, because, with the combination,
there is extreme power and a nice little cesspool mix of compiled,
interpreted lingo, you've got java compiled to java bytecode which isn't
really compiled but.. is.  Then Python with jython that is interpreted but
compiles somehow into a java class unless modified, and has full dynamic
access to all the java classes at any given time... I am using this nice
combination to make a very VERY mallable "bbs" if any of you rednecks have
heard of one, This will allow extreme "configuration" of the system, and
also provide crossplatform abilities and speed to boot.

the key here is OPTIONS, OPTIONS, OPTIONS!!
!@#!@#!@$%!@$!%^#$%^!@#$!@#%!^@$%&%

"Steve Holden" <sholden at holdenweb.com> wrote in message
news:xOAg6.11196$x4.177559 at e420r-atl2.usenetserver.com...
> "Hannah Schroeter" <hannah at schlund.de> wrote in message
> news:95ug7b$qp0$1 at c3po.schlund.de...
> > Hello!
> >
> > In article <5Iig6.1295$D3.5361 at tor-nn1.netcom.ca>,
> > Warren Postma <embed at geocities.com> wrote:
> >
> > >[...]
> >
> > >Various efforts to build a Compiler are in "research stages".  Dynamic
> > >languages don't respond well to attempts to compile them.   .
> Nevertheless,
> > >some very smart people seem to be trying.
> >
> > What about Lisp, which is very often compiled to native code?
> >
> > Besides, JIT technology is also there, already for a long time
> > (look at Smalltalk implementation techniques and see stuff implemented
> > a decade ago which they just "discover" for Java).
> >
> > Bottom line: I don't think that "dynamic languages don't respond well
> > to attempts to compile them". Techniques are there (again, see Lisp,
> > see Smalltalk, see Cecil/vortex for examples). I'd believe that
> > techniques from Smalltalk implementations could also apply to the
> > Python language.
> >
> > >Warren
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Hannah.
> >
> Well, LISP is kind of special: the typical list representation and
> car()/cdr() operations are pretty efficient if properly compiled. But most
> interpreted languages end up "compiling" down into calls to the
interpreter
> bytecode routines, which doesn't save much space or time. That was
certainly
> true for Icon, anyway, and I suspect would be for other similar languages.
>
> JIT might or might not be a win for Python, but programs would still end
up
> lugging a lot of support code around, and without static typing a lot of
> decisions still have to be deferred until run-time.
>
> regards
>  Steve
>
>