🚀 go-pugleaf

Christopher Dollin writes:
> Peter Schachte says:
> 
> > I think it's pretty important that an introductory
> > course use an interpreted language, so users don't have to start out by
> > learning too much extraneous stuff, like running compilers.
> 
But they still have to learn how to use the bloody interpreters.  Then they
forget what they learned when they go to a compiled language.  If you are
worried about a user not being able to handle the typical two to three
step process to compile, then write a shell script (As I did on VMS for
some old DEC-20 users).  It seems to me that an interpreter need these
same steps
	1. Start the interpreter	Compile your source.
	2. load your program		Link program (may be part of 1).
	3. Run your program		Run your program.

Looks like the same number of steps to me.  What you do loose in a compiled
environment is the ability to type a simple sequence of instructions (lines
of code if you will) into the computer.  This isn't entirely true, you could
place the small number of lines in a file called test1 or something like that
and compile it to see what happens.

> Oh, I suppose you don't get as much fancy single-stepping with compiled code.
> Don't seem to miss it ... 
> 
OH?  The debugger on VAX/VMS seems to handle source code single stepping in
a screen mode quite well.  As does dbx and dbxtool in Berkley Unix.  I know
that in the VMS debugger that you can evaluate expressions, set break points,
set watch points (tell me when variable X is changed), etc.  Since you have
to learn how to use a debugger ANYWAY, I would rather learn one that I can
use with compiled (upper level) languages, then learn one at the start of
my college career and another part way through.


-- 
bitnet:	lush@nmt.csnet			M. Warner Losh
csnet:	warner%hydrovax@nmtsun
uucp:	...{cmcl2, ihnp4}!lanl!unmvax!nmtsun!warner%hydrovax
	...{cmcl2, ihnp4}!lanl!unmvax!nmtsun!hydrovax
Warning:  Hydrovax is both a machine, and an account, so be careful.