Anonymous user
Languages: Difference between revisions
m
→But I heard of an OS written in language ABC, isn't it interpreted?: adding link
| [unchecked revision] | [unchecked revision] |
(Interpreted Basic is ancient.) |
|||
Line 40:
* The system ran on specialized hardware and microcode, which acted as hardwired 'interpreter' for it's primary language, or for the portable bytecode which it normally used. This type of system includes the Lisp Machines, SOAR (Smalltalk On A RISC), the Recursiv System, The Lillith Modula-2 System, and the Burroughs 6500 (a mainframe designed for running Algol-60 in the 1960s). The system programming techniques for these cannot work on stock hardware.
The FORTH systems are a special case in and of themselves. While FORTH is technically an interpreted language, the '[[stack]]-threaded' interpreter it uses works differently from most other interpreters; in effect, it walks through the various FORTH 'words' that the code is comprised of until it reaches the low-level words that are implemented in assembly or compiled code, which is what actually gets executed. Furthermore, FORTH systems incorporate a special sort of assembler, which produces code specifically meant to be used by the interpreter; also, commonly used 'words' can be compiled into native code as needed. Finally, many embedded FORTH systems use special-purpose hardware to support the language.
[[Category:Languages| ]]
| |||