On Sun, 16 Oct 2011, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 16 Oct 2011, at 11:42, Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
But hiding away the compilation step from the user does not turn a compiler
language into an interpreter language. There is no benefit in doing so. You can
simply compile your programs and then use the executable in your scripts. Where
is the problem?
There is no "problem". It's simply a matter of convenience. You may not think it to be
more convenient to edit source code and then "run" it without an explicit compilation
step in between, but other people obviously do. Trying to convince other people that there is no
benefit or trying to make them convince you that there is a benefit is unlikely to lead anywhere.
That said, adding a hack to the compiler to ignore a she-bang if it
appears at the start of a source file is extremely unlikely to ever happen
(and I'm personally not inclined to accept such patches).
Me neither. fpc is a compiler, not an interpreter...
instantfpc is a nice trick, and you can do some neat tricks with it
(web scripting for example), but it remains a trick.
Michael.
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
