Re: Re: Python/Parrot still alive? (fwd)

Guido van Rossum wrote:

>>Saw this on CLP.  I think it's probably a good point.
>>
>>- Stephan
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>It is interesting how interpreters have been rebranded as "virtual 
>>machines." Python people still use the word "interpreter" and that is 
>>probably not great from a marketing point of view.
>>
>>  Paul Prescod
>>    
>>
>
>In addition, "interpreter" has commonly two meanings: (1) the virtual
>machine; (2) the read-eval-print loop.
>
>I think that meaning 2 is probably not technically correct, but I've
>met so many people who used it in this way (often at the excusion of
>meaning 1) that this by itself is another reason to start using
>virtual machine.  OTOH we may usefully use meaning 2 to distinguish
>ourselves from Java (and even Perl).
>
>  
>
Some time ago i asked about the python virtual machine a got a reply in 
the lines of "python is defined at the language level, there is a 
virtual machine but its not intended for people to play with, it may and 
will change with versions of python."

Now with python 2.3 there is a byte code instructions list in the 
documentation. is this 'stable'?

As i see it, intrepreter imples compilation also, thats why its seen as 
worst than a virtual machine (methinks).

Marketing wise, i think that we should have a python virtual machine. 
(machine sounds powerfull :)

But the read-eval-print loop (interpreter for all those non lispy guys), 
is a powerfull tool. Maybe we should call it 'shell'... who knows :)

Lucio.