From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 20436 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2022 20:01:17 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 31 Jan 2022 20:01:17 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 4258D9B8E4; Tue, 1 Feb 2022 06:01:12 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0A909B67C; Tue, 1 Feb 2022 06:00:46 +1000 (AEST) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 3BDB1951B7; Tue, 1 Feb 2022 06:00:44 +1000 (AEST) Received: from cesium.clock.org (cesium.clock.org [157.22.10.65]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 303EB9518E for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2022 06:00:43 +1000 (AEST) Received: from cesium.clock.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cesium.clock.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D21ECBF35 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2022 12:00:40 -0800 (PST) From: "Erik E. Fair" In-reply-to: References: To: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2022 12:00:40 -0800 Message-ID: <499.1643659240@cesium.clock.org> Subject: Re: [TUHS] Compilation "vs" byte-code interpretation, was Re: Looking back to 1981 - what pascal was popular on what unix? X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" The definitions and boundaries between: Instruction Set Architecture (usually hardware, but see Webasm) P-code/bytecode interpreter internal instructions (e.g. Pascal, Java) Register Transfer Languages (RTL - compilers) seem awfully ... fuzzy. Are there any hard & fast rules for classifying = particular implementations into taxnomical categories? Wikipedia has an = over-arching definition for "intermediate representation" ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermediate_representation This is related to Unix in that Unix itself (both kernel system call API & C = library) is an abstracting intermediary between the hardware (whole computer = system including storage, networking), and application software, which "if = written portably" doesn't have to care what hardware it's run on, so long as = that hardware meets some minimum requirements for both Unix, and whatever the = application's needs are. Erik