From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/18184
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Kai Grossjohann <Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: Re: Pterodactyl Gnus v0.39 is released
Date: 26 Oct 1998 09:07:08 +0100
Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu
Message-ID: <vafr9vvu4pf.fsf@ramses.cs.uni-dortmund.de>
References: <m3d87hqknv.fsf@sparky.gnus.org> <kigyaq4oh2o.fsf@jagor.srce.hr> <m3ww5opoxk.fsf@sparky.gnus.org> <kigd87go276.fsf@jagor.srce.hr> <m31znwqnud.fsf@sparky.gnus.org> <kigemrwz24z.fsf@jagor.srce.hr> <m3d87gp7na.fsf@sparky.gnus.org> <kig1znwyz07.fsf@jagor.srce.hr>
NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035156753 4850 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 23:32:33 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 23:32:33 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: ding@gnus.org
Return-Path: <owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu>
Original-Received: from fisher.math.uh.edu (fisher.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.35])
	by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA14779
	for <jason@mailhost.sclp.com>; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 03:08:20 -0500 (EST)
Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5])
	by fisher.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id CAB29184;
	Mon, 26 Oct 1998 02:08:08 -0600 (CST)
Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Mon, 26 Oct 1998 02:07:47 -0600 (CST)
Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (root@sclp3.sclp.com [209.195.19.139]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA17287 for <ding@hpc.uh.edu>; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 02:07:39 -0600 (CST)
Original-Received: from waldorf.cs.uni-dortmund.de (waldorf.cs.uni-dortmund.de [129.217.4.42])
	by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA14771
	for <ding@gnus.org>; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 03:07:22 -0500 (EST)
Original-Received: from ramses.informatik.uni-dortmund.de (ramses.cs.uni-dortmund.de [129.217.20.180]) by waldorf.cs.uni-dortmund.de  with SMTP id JAA24666; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 09:07:11 +0100 (MET)
Original-Received: (grossjoh@localhost)
	by ramses.informatik.uni-dortmund.de id JAA08649; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 09:07:10 +0100
Original-To: Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr>
In-Reply-To: Hrvoje Niksic's message of "26 Oct 1998 00:59:04 +0100"
Original-Lines: 14
User-Agent: Gnus/5.070039 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.39) Emacs/20.3
Precedence: list
X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:18184
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:18184

>>>>> Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> writes:

  > But these things are not the point.  The point is that the crucial
  > difference (IMHO) is whether the code is interpreted or compiled, not
  > how it is compiled.  I don't buy the notion that a byte-compiled
  > function is somehow "less compiled" because it's not compiled to
  > native code.

I didn't see the beginning of the thread, but IMVHO byte-code is both
compiled and interpreted.

kai
-- 
Life is hard and then you die.