Not least because there’s no such thing as a “compiled” or “interpreted” language.
Which is to say that it’s a property of the tooling rather than the language itself. There’s nothing stopping anyone from writing a C interpreter or a Python compiler.
Not least because there’s no such thing as a “compiled” or “interpreted” language.
I’d say there is (but the line is a bit blurry). IMHO the main distinction is the presence (and prevalence) of eval semantics in the language; if it is present, then any “compiler” would have to embed itself into the generated code, thus de-facto turning it into a bundled interpreter.
That said, the argument that interpreted languages are somehow not programming languages is stupid.
Yeah, once you know all the details, the distinction disappears. The term doesn’t clarify understanding.
If I had to make a distinction, it’d be that scripting languages are meant to be a simple way to serve a specific niche. Things like SQL or Excel formulas. It doesn’t apply to Python.
Do you know what community you’re in? Do you want to start a war?
There is no clear definition because there is a lot of overlap, especially when you get into the details, but:
Scripting languages are often considered to be very high level and can commonly run without compilation. Making them great to automate tasks or create a simplified interaction/abstraction layer to a more complex program.
Programming languages usually have much lower level access, and by extension they tend to be more complicated. In exchange for that, you get much more control. Although the access varies from Assembly to languages a C programmer would consider “scripting”.
Although for every example, there is basically a counter example. Because programmers being who they are, see it as a challenge to do something with a language that others consider impossible or wrong.
For example, there are things like NodeOS, a “Lightweight operating system using Node.js as userspace.”
Scripting languages are often considered to be very high level and can commonly run without compilation. Making them great to automate tasks or create a simplified interaction/abstraction layer to a more complex program.
Then Python is not a scripting language.
Programming languages usually have much lower level access, and by extension they tend to be more complicated. In exchange for that, you get much more control.
Would you consider C to be more or less complicated than Perl?
No, I’m trying to get people to think. If I laid out my full opinions on this subject (compilers and interpreters aren’t that different anymore, even machine code often runs more like bytecode in many ways, “scripting” is a term that hides what’s actually going on, etc.), then people get into endless debates. My questions are designed to pick apart assumptions.
Admittedly, people didn’t appreciate when Socrates did this shit, either.
What’s the difference between a scripting language and a programming language?
Some people think that only compiled languages are true programming languages. (Needless to say, they’re wrong.)
Not least because there’s no such thing as a “compiled” or “interpreted” language.
Which is to say that it’s a property of the tooling rather than the language itself. There’s nothing stopping anyone from writing a C interpreter or a Python compiler.
Except god, hopefully
I’d say there is (but the line is a bit blurry). IMHO the main distinction is the presence (and prevalence) of
evalsemantics in the language; if it is present, then any “compiler” would have to embed itself into the generated code, thus de-facto turning it into a bundled interpreter.That said, the argument that interpreted languages are somehow not programming languages is stupid.
Yeah, once you know all the details, the distinction disappears. The term doesn’t clarify understanding.
If I had to make a distinction, it’d be that scripting languages are meant to be a simple way to serve a specific niche. Things like SQL or Excel formulas. It doesn’t apply to Python.
Do you know what community you’re in? Do you want to start a war?
There is no clear definition because there is a lot of overlap, especially when you get into the details, but:
Scripting languages are often considered to be very high level and can commonly run without compilation. Making them great to automate tasks or create a simplified interaction/abstraction layer to a more complex program.
Programming languages usually have much lower level access, and by extension they tend to be more complicated. In exchange for that, you get much more control. Although the access varies from Assembly to languages a C programmer would consider “scripting”.
Although for every example, there is basically a counter example. Because programmers being who they are, see it as a challenge to do something with a language that others consider impossible or wrong.
For example, there are things like NodeOS, a “Lightweight operating system using Node.js as userspace.”
No way this exists.
Wtf, it exists. Why would anyone do that to the world?
Then Python is not a scripting language.
Would you consider C to be more or less complicated than Perl?
The first comment worked as bait, but that last question is way too obvious.
Although just for fun:
That is true. It is often used as one, but it was developed from the start as a general-purpose language.
You know about Python, Perl and C. You know the answer and you’re just trying to incense people.
No, I’m trying to get people to think. If I laid out my full opinions on this subject (compilers and interpreters aren’t that different anymore, even machine code often runs more like bytecode in many ways, “scripting” is a term that hides what’s actually going on, etc.), then people get into endless debates. My questions are designed to pick apart assumptions.
Admittedly, people didn’t appreciate when Socrates did this shit, either.
One is:
/me ducks for cover
Still a language to make the computer do something. Thus, programming language. Scripts are programs.