Martin P. Hellwig wrote:
<div class="moz-text-flowed" style="font-family: -moz-fixed">Michel
Claveau - MVP wrote:
Hi!
Python is interpreted
No. Python is compiled (--> .pyc)
But the term "to compile" is not always unambiguous...
And the notion of "compiler" is not attached to Python (the
language), but is attached to the implementation.
@+
MCI
Well the pyc, which I thought was the Python bytecode, is then
interpreted by the VM.
As Michel says, "to compile" is not always unambiguous. My definition
includes a one-way transformation from human-readable source text into
something that can be more efficiently interpreted by other code, or by
hardware. The compiler really doesn't care whether the machine it's
targeting is real or virtual.
The CPython implementation of Python compiles the source text into a
bytecode file, with extension .pyc. That certainly is a compilation
step. Followed (much) later by an interpreted one.
To pick a specific implementation of C++, Microsoft C++ compiles C++
source text into an "executable file," with extension .exe (I'm
ignoring little details, like the linker). That's a compilation step.
Then the exe file is (later) interpreted by the microcode on the Pentium
chip.
As far as I know, nobody has yet built a microcode implementation of a
Python VM (Virtual Machine). Nor have I seen one for the Java VM.
However, in the early 80's there was a microcode implementation of the
P-system VM. It was never a commercial success, but it existed. And
there have been at least three Forth machines, where the hardware itself
was designed to support the language's VM. No microcode at all.
DaveA
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
