Linked by Shlomi Fish on Sat 16th Oct 2004 07:28 UTC
General Development The purpose of this essay is to explain why I believe Perl 6, the way it currently seems to progress, is the wrong thing at the wrong time, and why I predict (with all the expected caveats of predicting something) that it won't be successful. I will also suggest a better alternative for the future of Perl which makes more sense at this point.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by Lumbergh on Sun 17th Oct 2004 03:27 UTC

Well, I'll give you credit for having the balls to put your foot in your mouth again while you're way behind.

Anyways, the difference between a programming language and a scripting language is fairly simple. One actually compiles to machine code while the other one leaves the code wide open for anybody to see.

So by your definition unless there is machine code on disk it's a scripting language and not a programming language.....uhhhmmm, NOT.

A prime example would be comparing the two microsoft suites. Visual Studio 6 and Visual Studio 7. While one is a programming suite, the other is a scripting suite (minus VC++ 7 unmanaged option).


We're also not talking about 3rd party compilers (real compilers, not fake translaters), but of the language's native interpreter.

Ahh, ok. So these "scripting" languages "fake" translate.

So, let's sum up your post. Languages like Java and C# are "scripting" languages and not real programming languages because they emit bytecode and unless the "native" compiler dumps machine code to disk its a scripting language.

You are probably the only person in the world that holds that definition.