"Philippe C. Martin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>>and it was the only interpreter I've ever used that had no compilation >>>phase whatsoever) is no easier to deal with than compiled C. Ditto for >>>the various flavors of LISP I've worked with. > I do find working with an interpreter easier than with a compiler. A _long_ > time ago, I recall a boss telling me that I should write 5 lines of C a day > and compile/debug them twice at most (since it was so slow to get the stuff > compiled/linked anyway).
Have you tried working with an interpreter without an interactive mode? And if your compiled code takes more than a few seconds to build the program, then somethings wrong. Either your files are to big, or your build system sucks. > _one_ of the reasons why I intend to stick with python is because it's > interpreted/interactive I still wish it had a compiler. My favorite work environment ever was a Scheme system coupled with emacs. I'd write functions in emacs, ship them to schem for instant evaluation and run a test. When I was done, I'd compile the results to get a nice, fast binary. I've got all that in Python, except the compiler. <mike -- Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
