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=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM,PP_MIME_FAKE_ASCII_TEXT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,3ef3e78eacf6f938
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!188.40.43.213.MISMATCH!feeder.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Warren <ve3wwg@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Alternatives to C: ObjectPascal, Eiffel, Ada or Modula-3?
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 15:23:35 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <Xns9D4573E5A41F9WarrensBlatherings@188.40.43.245>
References: 
 <7a0c7a19-5d83-4cc6-be68-95ebf41533e7@t23g2000yqt.googlegroups.com>
 <nospam-116295.16271923032010@news.aioe.org>
 <3b3f991b-8fcd-435c-83f6-e1a1a5e8f6ed@a31g2000prd.googlegroups.com>
 <nospam-E19D5A.22083823032010@news.aioe.org>
Injection-Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 15:23:35 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: feeder.eternal-september.org;
	logging-data="1764"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19CoYaFEEyp+EJP+FeUf7gVvUxyWEuUJCc="
User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25
X-Face: 
 &6@]C2>ZS=NM|HE-^zWuryN#Z/2_.s9E|G&~DRi|sav9{E}XQJb*\_>=a5"q]\%A;5}LKP][1mA{gZ,Q!j
Cancel-Lock: sha1:0Vx5Urqh7GpvOYNBfzOaJJBkK4A=
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:10710
Date: 2010-03-24T15:23:35+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

John B. Matthews expounded in news:nospam-E19D5A.22083823032010
@news.aioe.org:

> In article 
> <3b3f991b-8fcd-435c-83f6-e1a1a5e8f6ed@a31g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
>  Adam Beneschan <adam@irvine.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Mar 23, 1:27 pm, "John B. Matthews" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> > In article
>> > <7a0c7a19-5d83-4cc6-be68-95ebf4153...@t23g2000yqt.googlegroups.com>,
>> >
>> >  cbcurl <cbc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > since when was Pascal ever an interpreted language
>> >
>> > AFAIK, ca. 1977, <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UCSD_Pascal>.
>> 
>> I wouldn't call it an interpreted language, really.  The UCSD 
>> compiler generated code for a machine that didn't exist, and then 
>> programs ran by interpreting that machine's instructions.  
-------------------^^^^^^^^^^^^

I smell an interpreter!

>> This doesn't meet my criteria for what I'd call an interpreted 
>> language.  For that, I'd assume that the interpreter reads the 
>> original source statements, or some sort of tokenized form that bears 
>> a close relation to the original source statements, while running the 
>> program.  

That's a pretty narrow view.

Usually ppl talk of "interpreted" vs "native code execution".
It would be incorrect IMO to call p-code natively executed
code.

Warren