Anonymous user
Talk:Interactive programming (repl): Difference between revisions
Talk:Interactive programming (repl) (view source)
Revision as of 06:08, 23 February 2009
, 15 years ago→Interpreter or not?
(→Interpreter or not?: the common use of CLI stands for Interface, not Interpreter) |
|||
Line 31:
:But the common definition of "CLI", which makes it so frequent, is "command-line interface", not "command-line interpreter". (Which, by the way, I would have no objection to the use of as the name of this task, if others see it as fitting. My goal here is entirely to promote terminology which does not propagate the impression that Anything Interactive is Interpreted (and therefore also seen as Inefficient). --[[User:Kevin Reid|Kevin Reid]] 22:02, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
CLI is the common acronym, but the full phrase is used as the page title so there should be no confusion.
As an aside, you should be wary of equating interpretation with inefficiency without further explanation. Forth for example is interpreted, gives very small executables, and can beat C compilers on speed. Inefficiency in programmer productivity, speed, memory footprint ... ? --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 06:08, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
| |||