> "Dean Theophilou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I understand what you're saying but the fact remains: STRICTLY speaking,
> Perl is NOT an interpreted language (such as the BASIC language I learned in
> high school, many, many years ago). Sure, there is an interpreter, but
> there is also a compile phase (which is the point you sorta made in your 2nd
> paragraph). Now, I make no claims at being an expert on this, but if your
> argument is that the authors of Perl in a Nutshell are wrong, then say so.
> And if that's the case, then I will research it some more.
I think we are in violent agreement. :-) I have not read the Perl in a
Nutshell book. I suspect from your reasoning that I would agree with them. My
point was pedagogical. e.g. to shed some light on the differences between the
traditional compile->load->run programming paradigm and what the perl system
does.
--
Smoot Carl-Mitchell
Consultant
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
