Comment Re:One line? (Score 1) 169
BBC basic was interpreted, not compiled (though there may have been compilers written for it since).
It was my original instinct to say the same (since nearly all basic languages are), but I looked it up on wikipedia before posting and found that there was indeed a compiler for it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...
A Compiler for BBC BASIC V was produced by Paul Fellows, team leader of the Arthur OS development, and published initially by DABS Press.[citation needed] This was able to implement almost all of the language, with the obvious exception of the EVAL function – which inevitably required run-time programmatic interpretation. As evidence of its completeness, it was able to support in-line assembler syntax. The compiler itself was written in BBC BASIC. The compiler (running under the interpreter in the early development stages) was able to compile itself, and versions that were distributed were self-compiled object code.[original research?] Many applications initially written to run under the interpreter benefitted from the performance boost that this gave, putting BBC BASIC on a par with other languages for serious application development.
There's not a whole lot of info about it on wikipedia, and it doesn't even say when it was written (and there are no citations), so I have no idea if it was something recent or very old.