Newsgroups: comp.ai,comp.ai.genetic,comp.ai.neural-nets,comp.lang.lisp,comp.lang.c++,comp.os.msdos.programmer,comp.lang.asm.x86,comp.unix.programmer,comp.ai.philosophy
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!cornellcs!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!netcom.com!jqb
From: jqb@netcom.com (Jim Balter)
Subject: Re: Lisp is not an interpreted language
Message-ID: <jqbE0Iu9B.Awv@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <327D00D8.4B9F@earthlink.net> <55qi3l$j5p@dawn.mmm.com> <3280FE73.1259@dma.isg.mot.com> <55t27r$dk9@godzilla.cs.nwu.edu>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 22:24:47 GMT
Lines: 17
Sender: jqb@netcom23.netcom.com
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.ai:41976 comp.ai.genetic:10278 comp.ai.neural-nets:34426 comp.lang.lisp:23579 comp.lang.c++:224715 comp.os.msdos.programmer:81392 comp.lang.asm.x86:31576 comp.unix.programmer:52237 comp.ai.philosophy:48433

In article <55t27r$dk9@godzilla.cs.nwu.edu>,
Seth Tisue <tisue@cs.nwu.edu> wrote:
>In article <3280FE73.1259@dma.isg.mot.com>,
>Mukesh Prasad  <mprasad@dma.isg.mot.com> wrote:
>>But if one has to have this distinction, Lisp should
>>fall into the "interpreted" category, since the
>>"compiled" byte-code is interpreted by sofware, not
>>the hardware.
>
>There are many Lisp compilers which compile to native code, not byte
>code.  (It seems that many have been pointing this out on this thread
>for some time, to no avail...)

Ignorance memes are highly resistant and mutate readily.
-- 
<J Q B>

