(no title)
agytvfr | 5 years ago
>Note that, by this definition, assembly languages occupy a position intermediate between machine languages and compiled languages.
And:
> Thus, I take the point at issue to be: “To what extent is it desirable for the system programmer to specify machine details?”
Basically this is an article about the importance of machine independent languages, and not about using Python for your userland or something similar.
alexvoda|5 years ago
wassenaar10|5 years ago
Of course, we all know that there's a pretty marked difference in programming in a language like C vs a language like Python, for example. So often people use "higher-level" or "lower-level" to express this comparison. I wouldn't even argue that those are bad terms to express that difference, but over time people have conflated "C is a lower-level language than Python" with "C is a low level language", which brings us to where we are now where "high-level language" and "low-level language" have, as you said, fuzzy definitions in colloquial usage.
smegcicle|5 years ago
It used to be less fuzzy (assembled -- compiled) and now has more components (dynamic typing, garbage collection), but I don't see how anyone could deduce that the scale is nolonger a meaningful high-level (:^o) classification of a language.
emteycz|5 years ago