Related articles |
---|
[7 earlier articles] |
Re: Scripting vs. Programming language vs. 4GL? ch+@cs.cmu.edu (1993-08-30) |
Re: Scripting vs. Programming language vs. 4GL? prechelt@ira.uka.de (Lutz Prechelt) (1993-08-30) |
Re: Scripting vs. Programming language vs. 4GL? ram+@cs.cmu.edu (1993-08-30) |
Re: Scripting vs. Programming language vs. 4GL? mcdonald@kestrel.edu (1993-08-31) |
Re: Scripting vs. Programming language vs. 4GL? wright@hicomb.hi.com (David Wright) (1993-09-01) |
Re: Scripting vs. Programming language vs. 4GL? pardo@cs.washington.edu (1993-09-02) |
Re: Scripting vs. Programming language vs. 4GL? joshua@athena.veritas.com (1993-09-07) |
Re: Scripting vs. Programming language vs. 4GL? pcg@decb.aber.ac.uk (1993-09-11) |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
From: | joshua@athena.veritas.com (Joshua Levy) |
Keywords: | interpreter, design |
Organization: | VERITAS Software Corp., Santa Clara CA |
References: | 93-08-096 93-08-121 |
Date: | Tue, 7 Sep 1993 20:35:57 GMT |
IMHO, the difference between a scripting language, and programming
language and a 4GL is the goals of the language's creator. I'm not joking
about this.
If the language's creator was trying to create a programming language,
then the result is a programming language. Ditto for scriptiong
languages. If a scripting language is designed for use with forms, GUIs,
and data bases, then it is a 4GL.
Since most designers make public why a given language was created, it is
usually not hard to determine (using this method) if a language is a
scripting language or programming language. One problem with this method
is that you can not determine, just by looking at a language, if it is for
scripting or programming, you must ask the designer. But isn't this the
way it works in real life?
The difference is the goal of the language, and only the designer knows
that.
Joshua Levy <joshua@veritas.com>
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.