|Difference between Interpreter and DR firstname.lastname@example.org (Greg Simon) (1996-10-16)|
|Difference between Interpreter and DR email@example.com (Stephen J Bevan) (1996-10-18)|
|Re: Difference between Interpreter and DR firstname.lastname@example.org (Christian Smith) (1996-10-18)|
|Re: Difference between Interpreter and DR email@example.com (1996-10-20)|
|Re: Difference between Interpreter and DR firstname.lastname@example.org (1996-10-25)|
|From:||Christian Smith <email@example.com>|
|Date:||18 Oct 1996 08:42:01 -0400|
Greg Simon wrote:
> I'm confused about the difference between an interpreter and a DR
> (dynamic recompiler). I assume the DR generates native machine language
> on the fly, and then executes it; whereas an interpreter just has a set
> of routines to execute for different types of icode encountered, right?
I don't think a DR has to convert to native code. It may compile it
into another type icode that is quicker to interpret. This is
certainly a valid form of compilation.
An interpreter acts on the source as is, without storing the results
of parsing. When a section of code is re-executed, it is re-parsed.
A DR would store this previously parsed code in another form for
re-execution in the future, without needing to reparse.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.