From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 107f24,582dff0b3f065a52
X-Google-Attributes: gid107f24,public
X-Google-Thread: 1014db,582dff0b3f065a52
X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,bc1361a952ec75ca
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,582dff0b3f065a52
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-08-02 02:13:27 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!141.201.2.63!newshunter!cosy.sbg.ac.at!newsfeed.Austria.EU.net!newsfeed.kpnqwest.at!newsfeed.wu-wien.ac.at!not-for-mail
From: Markus Mottl <mottl@miss.wu-wien.ac.at>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.functional
Subject: Re: How Ada could have prevented the Red Code distributed denial of
  service attack.
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:13:26 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: University of Economics and Business Administration, Vienna,
 Austria
Message-ID: <9kb5jm$mg1$1@bird.wu-wien.ac.at>
References: <bebbba07.0107292308.d1192fc@posting.google.com>
   <87n15lxzzv.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <yecofq03kih.fsf@king.cts.com>
 <3B672322.B5EA1B66@home.com> <ppsemtojqkqsqpfvj1th3mae8b4vu1tg89@4ax.com>
 <tmfvrpmb575l80@corp.supernews.com>
 <slrn9mg902.aa.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <yu8zo9jcyah.fsf@mcowan-linux.transmeta.com>
 <9ka1e1$b5h$2@bird.wu-wien.ac.at> <3B688D21.810C5706@eton.powernet.co.uk>
 <9ka33g$b5h$4@bird.wu-wien.ac.at>
 <slrn9mh69g.pbv.wnoise@barter.ugcs.caltech.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: miss.wu-wien.ac.at
X-Trace: bird.wu-wien.ac.at 996743606 23041 137.208.107.17 (2 Aug 2001
 09:13:26 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news-admin@wu-wien.ac.at
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:13:26 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-981225 ("Volcane") (UNIX) (OSF1/V4.0 (alpha))
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11055 comp.lang.c:71585
 comp.lang.c++:79293 comp.lang.functional:7165
Date: 2001-08-02T09:13:26+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In comp.lang.functional Aaron Denney <wnoise@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:
> CINT, EiC, and ICI seem to be the most popular ones.

I knew about CINT, which actually interprets C++ and is heavily used in
CERN's ROOT-project (data visualization). One can get pretty far with
those interpreters (at least with CINT). Still, I wouldn't say that
C/C++-interpreters are anywhere close to being commonly used. Other
languages lend themselves to interpretation much more easily.

Regards,
Markus Mottl

-- 
Markus Mottl, mottl@miss.wu-wien.ac.at, http://miss.wu-wien.ac.at/~mottl