mikshaw
Group: Members
Posts: 4856
Joined: July 2004 |
 |
Posted: July 11 2007,14:37 |
 |
I also must say that it is an unfair comparison (what is this site, by the way, and what do you mean by "beats"?). An interpreted language has its own benefits over a compiled application, and these benefits are becoming more apparent as cpu speeds and memory availability increase, making overall performance differences less noticeable and less important.
Some of the more obvious benefits of an interpreted language are:
No compiling is necessary, which makes it much easier to test and modify.
Generally less code needed to accomplish the same task.
If the interpreter is cross-platform, the script often is too (basic programs would need to be recompiled for each platform).
It's usually always open source (very few exceptions).
I'm sure there are more technical things to compare, but since I have practically no experience with compiled languages I am no authority. Here's a lengthy piece of text focusing on interpreted languages:
http://www.tcl.tk/doc/scripting.html
| Quote | | opengl or gtk2 programs with basic are possible |
They are possible with script as well. In fact, there is a tiny tool called GTK-server which allows you to use gtk 1 or 2 elements from just about any script, including Bash.
--------------
http://www.tldp.org/LDP/intro-linux/html/index.html
|
.
DSL Market ,
Great VPS hosting provided by Tektonic
