Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by direwolf20 61 days ago
Interpreters don't translate bytecode to native instructions.
2 comments
SJC_Hacker 61 days ago
The usual understanding of "interpreter" in a CS context is program that executes source code directly without a compilation step. However the binary that translates an intermediate bytecode to native machine code is at least sometimes called a "bytecode interpreter".

https://doc.pypy.org/en/latest/interpreter.html

link
ghusbands 61 days ago
This is still incorrect. A bytecode interpreter, as its name indicates, interprets a bytecode. Typically, compiling a bytecode to native machine code is the work of a JIT compiler.
link
genxy 61 days ago
They do now https://github.com/bytecodealliance/weval
link
ghusbands 61 days ago
That's a partial evaluator, not an interpreter, and it converts an interpreter into compiler, which are different things.
link
genxy 61 days ago
> Interpreters don't translate bytecode to native instructions.

> That's a partial evaluator, not an interpreter, and it converts an interpreter into compiler, which are different things.

https://old.reddit.com/r/Compilers/comments/1sm90x5/retrofit...

link
ghusbands 61 days ago
Yes, that's another great example of the same kind of thing - creating a JIT from an interpreter. It remains true that interpreters do not directly generate machine code.
link
genxy 61 days ago
The author of weval is the top comment.

Reading the comments and understanding that transitively, weval turns interpreters into compilers, allowing interpreters to generate machine code.

link
direwolf20 61 days ago
If you turn milk into cheese it isn't milk any more, and it doesn't prove that milk is a yellow solid.
link