in reply to Re^3: Performance penalties of in-Perl docn vs compiled CGIs.
in thread Performance penalties of in-Perl docn vs compiled CGIs.
Both languages have a "virtual machine" with OP-codes/Bytecode which is/can be interpreted.
My point is, the black and white distinctions between compiler and interpreter are from the <80s and don't match the current shades of grey anymore.
Cheers Rolf
(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
Wikisyntax for the Monastery
update
Please correct me, but IIRC is JIT only attempting to compile a code path if past interpretation proved to be inefficient. Hence "interpretation" is still the default.
update
from WP: Just-in-time_compilation
A system implementing a JIT compiler typically continuously analyses the code being executed and identifies parts of the code where the speedup gained from compilation or recompilation would outweigh the overhead of compiling that code.JIT compilation is a combination of the two traditional approaches to translation to machine code – ahead-of-time compilation (AOT), and interpretation – and combines some advantages and drawbacks of both.
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re^5: Performance penalties of in-Perl docn vs compiled CGIs. (updated x 2)
by dave_the_m (Monsignor) on Feb 03, 2021 at 18:44 UTC | |
by LanX (Saint) on Feb 03, 2021 at 19:19 UTC |