Re: Low-level vs. High-level programming (was My First Computer)

["Really" <barryem@yahoo.com>]

"Paul Schlyter" <pausch@saaf.se> wrote in message
news:bcvu45$1tjm$1@merope.saaf.se...
> In article <038073c84e3fe3a00a40ffb3fe9d76b5@TeraNews>,
> Really <barryem@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >"Tjoff Tjonk" <tjoff@tjonk.now> wrote in message
> >pan.2003.06.20.07.22.12.341074@tjonk.now">news:pan.2003.06.20.07.22.12.341074@tjonk.now...
> >> On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:09:30 -0500, Randy McLaughlin wrote:
> >>
> >> There are no fundamental differences between a compiler and an
> >> interpreter; it is possible to write a BASIC compiler, and it
is
> >> possible to write a C or C++ interpreter.
> >
> >I have BASIC compilers and a C interpreter (quincy).  This has
no
> >real bearing on the argument.
> >
> >My definition says machine instructions are a program.  Compiled
C
> >and some compiled BASICs produce machine instructions and are
> >therefore programs.
> >
> >Interpreted code, be it C or BASIC, don't produce machine
> >instructions.  In the absence of their interpreter they can do
> >nothing at all.  As with HTML.  The program is the interpreter.
>
> Does that mean that an Apple II Basic program is not a program?
>
> Does that mean that an Apple II machine language program is a
program
> only if run on Apple II hardware, but nit if interpreted on an
Apple II
> software emulator ???

You too are right.  My definition doesn't work here.  Consider it
withdrawn.

Barry