Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!menudo.uh.edu!lobster!nuchat!sugar!ficc!peter
From: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: A comment on language wars.
Message-ID: <B_-9LP3@xds13.ferranti.com>
Date: 11 Mar 91 17:05:51 GMT
References: <R_V9_AC@xds13.ferranti.com> <MARKF.91Mar6122504@montreux.ai.mit.edu> <7HY9P4G@xds13.ferranti.com> <1991Mar10.145908.10575@hawk.cs.ukans.edu>
Reply-To: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Lines: 14

In article <1991Mar10.145908.10575@hawk.cs.ukans.edu> billk@hawk.cs.ukans.edu (Bill Kinnersley) writes:
> Definition of an interpreter: 

>    A case statement inside a do loop.

> Anything that examines a sequence of data items and makes a series of
> decisions based on what it finds there..."That's an interpreter!"

How explicit does the do loop have to be? A jump table that you dive into
on a periodic basis, with a bunch of raw code around it? That's basically
what object-oriented languages use.
-- 
Peter da Silva.  `-_-'  peter@ferranti.com
+1 713 274 5180.  'U`  "Have you hugged your wolf today?"