On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 5:10 AM, Aai <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Note also the word "Compiling" here.
>
> ... and the phrase '.... interpreted' after that. Compiled here is
> 'compiled to byte code'.

That was a hint, not definitive.

> Using 'let' is not a matter of being confronted with a different
> language, but a matter of defining a function interactively. But ok, I
> advice you to read about 'ghci' being part of the package GHC
> (containing the compiler ghc and the interpreter ghci):

The issue I am trying to raise is that you cannot use the same
language for compiled programs that you can use for interactive
programs.  I am not sure if you are trying to claim that these
languages are equivalent, or if you simply are not aware that that is
what I am saying or if something else is going on.

They do have a sub-language in common, but that common sub-language
only admits single line statements which are not declarations.

Meanwhile, sharing an implementation does not make languages
equivalent.  Otherwise C and C++ would be the same language.

-- 
Raul
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to