[ska]

> Scripting languages are by definition interpreted.

I don't think this is correct. Scripting aren't rigorously defined, of course, but it would be reasonable to say they are defined by practice (i.e. a scripting language is practical for scripting).

Most compiled languages knock themselves out of contention in this definition because the startup and/or compile times are too long to be practical. But I've used luaJit in scripting contexts before, so that at least muddies the waters. Also common lisp (a variant that was always compiled).

[MiroF]

It's a term for a simpler era where these divides made sense.

I've always understood it to mean interpreted and from a quick google search there are at least a sizeable number of people who agree.

I think now that there are a lot of high level compiled languages, it makes less sense.