This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
I find it humorous that Python (programming language), rather than Python is the first result on Google for wikipedia+python. 71.167.32.238 ( talk) 18:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi, (please excuse me if this is not the right place for my entry). In the near future and for at least a couple of years it seems we will be having mainstream Python2.x and Python 3.y Python distributions with divergent syntax. What happens to the number of Python examples throughout Wikipedia?
I would favour a solution that would keep Python examples as meaning 2.x examples as it is now, and for Python 3.y examples to be explicitly stated as such, (including the syntax highlighter). I think examples in both versions should co-exist for a time. -- Paddy ( talk) 07:34, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
I edited the line in the intro that said "Python...emphasizes the importance of programmer effort over computer effort." I understand what this is trying to say, but it's ambiguous short-hand programmer-speak. A newbie could even interpret it as meaning that Python emphasizes that it's important for programmers to put in more effort. See what I mean? The tradeoff with execution time may be relevant, but doesn't need to be in the intro. C1932 ( talk) 04:46, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello everyone,
I hope not to disturb your work, but here is a small curiosity:
I just did a search for Python and got to the disambiguation page, where it says:
Python (mythology), the oracular serpent of Delphi
While on the Borland Delphi-page is stated about the name of the programming language:
"If you want to talk to [the] Oracle, go to Delphi"
..I'm confused! ;) 139.91.179.210 ( talk) 18:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
"Nothing deep about it" != "has nothing to do with reptiles"
. "Nothing deep" could mean anything, it doesn't clarify the issue. Language itself is "deep" (programming, natural, or otherwise).Quoting the python.org website:
“ | By the way, the language is named after the BBC show ``Monty Python's Flying Circus'' and has nothing to do with nasty reptiles. [3] | ” |
For me this is an authoritative direct substantiation, with or without GvR's assertion. -- Lambiam 16:43, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
don't want to be annoying, but shouldn't a page on a programming language include the traditional "hello, world!" program example thing? i mean it's a standard for presenting a programming language 89.123.249.91 ( talk) 17:39, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
I searched for Phillip J Eby on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=%22Phillip+J+Eby%22&go=Go
One of the results was:
I've followed the link to this page and there's no text anything like that. I checked recent history, too. What gives?
Thanks -- Irrevenant [ talk ] 03:05, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be some back and forth on languages that influenced Python. I'm not sure the best way to come to an agreement (as I'm a newbie here). I offered a recent change based on first-hand experience as a Python developer. In the example in question, I amended the description of list comprehension influences to include SETL, because SETL and Haskell were the two languages with list comprehensions that the developers discussed when designing the feature. Should I document my own recollections elsewhere, then cite them as a reference? That seems like a tedious thing to do for all changes, but perhaps is useful for changes where there is disagreement.
Thanks -- Jeremy Hylton —Preceding comment was added at 23:02, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
The main point, in my mind, of mentioning Haskell as an influence is more about its influence on itertools than on listcomps. Raymond Hettinger explicitly studied the Haskell prologue to evaluate which itertools were important to support. But perhaps we do not mention Haskell's influence in the best way or context (let me go look again). LotLE× talk 05:39, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
I am adding a link to my website where I show how to install Python on Windows Vista. It is not intuitive and I think it is a useful addition to this page. ( Neuralwiki ( talk) 04:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC))
For the data type str and unicode it says it's "An immutable sequence of characters". I'm not a python expert but this seems incorrect to me. You can definitely change a string or unicode. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.61.6.82 ( talk) 21:20, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
>>> s = "foo" >>> id(s) 3792352 >>> s = s+"bar" >>> id(s) 3792320
LotLE× talk 04:40, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
I wonder if I'm "David" in 76.87..'s comment (it's my name, but not my username; not hard to figure out though). In any case, the example really does show immutability, even in an FP sense. The point is that the object whose id is 3792353 can never be anything other than "foo" (during that interpreter run; of course that id might be used for something else during a different run). 's' happens to be a way to refer to object 3792352. If nothing refers to that object, it will be garbage collected at some point too. But I might also refer to object 3792352 in other ways, e.g. (I don't even have to fake id's since as an implementation accident, ids are just hashes of strings, more-or-less):
>>> s = "foo" >>> id(s) 3792352 >>> s2 = s >>> l = [s] >>> s = s+"bar" >>> s
'foobar'
>>> id(s), id(l[0]), id(s2) (3792384, 3792352, 3792352)
LotLE× talk 18:26, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
[~]$ python Python 2.4.2 (#1, Mar 22 2006, 18:15:19) [GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 5250)] on darwin Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> n = 1234 >>> id(n) 25180820 >>> m = 2345 >>> id(m) 25180796 [~]$ python Python 2.4.2 (#1, Mar 22 2006, 18:15:19) [GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 5250)] on darwin Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> m = 2345 >>> n = 1234 >>> id(n), id(m) (25180820, 25180796)
Hmm, more confusion, at least as far as Python is concerned. Python immutability is not a property of variable names; a variable can (more or less) always be rebound. Python immutability is a property of data objects, and has to do with whether their contents can be altered in place.
>>> nums = [1, 2, 3] >>> nums[0] 1 >>> nums[0] = 42 >>> nums [42, 2, 3] >>> wiki = "Wikipedia" >>> wiki[0] 'W' >>> wiki[0] = "P" Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in ? TypeError: object does not support item assignment
As you can see, the array in the variable nums
can have its contents altered, but the string in the variable wiki
cannot. However, it's perfectly legal to rebind the variable to a whole new value:
>>> wiki = 42 >>> wiki = nums >>> wiki = "Wikipedia" >>> wiki = wiki + wiki >>> wiki 'WikipediaWikipedia'
This is likewise what's going on in the above s = s + "bar"
example. A new string object is being conjured up by the s + "bar"
expression, and then the variable s
is pointed to that object. The string it previously pointed to may perhaps be garbage-collected, since it does not share structure with the new one. --
FOo (
talk)
10:11, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
The colon serves no useful purpose in the syntax parsing of the language. Why is it then required by the parser? It inhibits the natural expression of logic as part of program flow by adding a nonsensical characters for block delineation. See the following links for a discussion of the issue, [7] [8]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.142.120.234 ( talk) 07:39, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Since JASC software was bought out by Corel, which proceeded to dismantle Paint Shop Pro (turning it into a mere photo editor), the existing reference (currently {41}) to it found in paragraph titled "Usage" no longer applies. Should that reference be omitted?
If so, can someone explain to me how Wikipedia handles the references number sequences and resequencing? Does everything get automatically renumbered without skipping any number, or would omission/deletion, leave a gap in the numerical series? KnowBuddy ( talk) 17:04, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
A poem circulated in the module 'this':
"The Zen of Python, by Tim Peters
Beautiful is better than ugly.
Explicit is better than implicit.
Simple is better than complex.
Complex is better than complicated.
Flat is better than nested.
Sparse is better than dense.
Readability counts.
Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules.
Although practicality beats purity.
Errors should never pass silently.
Unless explicitly silenced.
In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess.
There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it.
Although that way may not be obvious at first unless you're Dutch.
Now is better than never.
Although never is often better than *right* now.
If the implementation is hard to explain, it's a bad idea.
If the implementation is easy to explain, it may be a good idea.
Namespaces are one honking great idea -- let's do more of those!"
Why not include this in the Philosophy section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.14.43 ( talk) 15:16, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi,
I don't think this revert is appropriate, especially given the rationale.
Given that it isn't disputed that Python is high-level, but it is disputed that it's very high-level, I reckon we should just use high-level. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Chris that it should be high-level programming language rather than very high-level programming language. Martinelli's work is an excellent Python reference, and I don't detract from it. But Martinelli is a known Python advocate, and advocacy is not an objective of a Wikipedia article. There's no question that Python is high-level, but "very high-level" is getting more into areas of opinion.
Lulu, your work on this article is appreciated, but being a long-standing editor does not bestow any particular weight to your views. I know you're very protective of this article, but this might be a good time for you to re-read WP:OWN. TJRC ( talk) 18:24, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Solution: extend the VHLL article? Since the current VHLL article on Wikipedia is a stub (and the ACM articles require a subscription), it would be a great help if you experts ( David , Chris and TJRC) could work together to get it into a generally useful state, e.g. so that non-expert software development readers can appreciate the criteria that distinguish VHLLs, HLLs, 4GLs etc. Once that groundwork is in place, it might be appropriate to add sub-sections to show why Python, Ruby &c should be regarded as VHLLs. Any debate could then take place on the VHLL talk page, which would provide a better context for the discussion. Does that work for you? - Pointillist ( talk) 23:07, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
In the Usage section, this is said:
AFAIK, as a long-time Slackware user, Slackware does not use Anaconda. However, not being a Slackware guru, I'm uncomfortable with taking definitive action over this matter. I mean, it would take some work to merge Anaconda into Slackware to make this statement true :D
But seriously, if nobody disagrees within a couple days or so, I guess I'll remove Slackware from that list.-- I80and ( talk) 13:34, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Is that snake logo official? According to the creator of Python, the programming language Python does not relate to the snake, but to the Monty python flying circus. The logo should therefore be a big fot IMO. -- Malin Randstrom ( talk) 07:32, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
I came across a good non-trivial code sample on the German Wikipedia, an implementation of quicksort. See de:Python_(Programmiersprache).
def quicksort(liste):
if len(liste) <= 1:
return liste
pivotelement = liste0
links = element for element in liste1:] if element < pivotelement
rechts = element for element in liste1:] if element >= pivotelement
return quicksort(links) + pivotelement + quicksort(rechts)
Perhaps I'm not looking hard enough, but I don't see an obvious place to put it. I'm also not entirely sure what I need to do GFDL-wise to import the code sample here. Karl Dickman talk 21:02, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
The opening paragraph doesn't mention that Python is also a scripting language. Isn't it? Like scripting languages, it's more interpreted than compiled, it's often used to direct other applications, and allows for unstructured use. Without something of the sort added to the opening, it makes Python sound no better than C or C++, which are also "general purpose high-level programming languages". -- A D Monroe III ( talk) 13:55, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Trouble is, "scripting language" is a problematic expression. Python is sometimes used for scripting, but it's also used for applications. It certainly isn't a systems language -- you wouldn't write device drivers in it -- but the notion that every language is either "systems" or "scripting" is a false dichotomy.
As for "interpreted", that's also problematic. CPython is a bytecode compiler and virtual machine. (You can get native-code compilation with Psyco, or by using Jython (to generate Java bytecode) and a native-code Java compiler.) Python is never an "interpreter" in the classic sense of a program that converts source code to an abstract syntax tree and runs the program by walking the tree, like eval in freshman Lisp interpreters.
Yes, people often use "interpreter" to mean the Python interactive console, but that's a bit of a solecism. If you define "interpreter" that way, then Python has an interpreter but Perl doesn't -- even though both use the same execution strategy under the hood. (Using "interpreter" to mean "interactive console" also pisses off the Lisp folks, who will point out that SBCL compiles everything to machine code, even expressions you type in interactively.)
The usual expression these days for the class of languages including Python, Perl, and Ruby seems to be "dynamic language". -- FOo ( talk) 18:25, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
I find it humorous that Python (programming language), rather than Python is the first result on Google for wikipedia+python. 71.167.32.238 ( talk) 18:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi, (please excuse me if this is not the right place for my entry). In the near future and for at least a couple of years it seems we will be having mainstream Python2.x and Python 3.y Python distributions with divergent syntax. What happens to the number of Python examples throughout Wikipedia?
I would favour a solution that would keep Python examples as meaning 2.x examples as it is now, and for Python 3.y examples to be explicitly stated as such, (including the syntax highlighter). I think examples in both versions should co-exist for a time. -- Paddy ( talk) 07:34, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
I edited the line in the intro that said "Python...emphasizes the importance of programmer effort over computer effort." I understand what this is trying to say, but it's ambiguous short-hand programmer-speak. A newbie could even interpret it as meaning that Python emphasizes that it's important for programmers to put in more effort. See what I mean? The tradeoff with execution time may be relevant, but doesn't need to be in the intro. C1932 ( talk) 04:46, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello everyone,
I hope not to disturb your work, but here is a small curiosity:
I just did a search for Python and got to the disambiguation page, where it says:
Python (mythology), the oracular serpent of Delphi
While on the Borland Delphi-page is stated about the name of the programming language:
"If you want to talk to [the] Oracle, go to Delphi"
..I'm confused! ;) 139.91.179.210 ( talk) 18:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
"Nothing deep about it" != "has nothing to do with reptiles"
. "Nothing deep" could mean anything, it doesn't clarify the issue. Language itself is "deep" (programming, natural, or otherwise).Quoting the python.org website:
“ | By the way, the language is named after the BBC show ``Monty Python's Flying Circus'' and has nothing to do with nasty reptiles. [3] | ” |
For me this is an authoritative direct substantiation, with or without GvR's assertion. -- Lambiam 16:43, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
don't want to be annoying, but shouldn't a page on a programming language include the traditional "hello, world!" program example thing? i mean it's a standard for presenting a programming language 89.123.249.91 ( talk) 17:39, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
I searched for Phillip J Eby on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=%22Phillip+J+Eby%22&go=Go
One of the results was:
I've followed the link to this page and there's no text anything like that. I checked recent history, too. What gives?
Thanks -- Irrevenant [ talk ] 03:05, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be some back and forth on languages that influenced Python. I'm not sure the best way to come to an agreement (as I'm a newbie here). I offered a recent change based on first-hand experience as a Python developer. In the example in question, I amended the description of list comprehension influences to include SETL, because SETL and Haskell were the two languages with list comprehensions that the developers discussed when designing the feature. Should I document my own recollections elsewhere, then cite them as a reference? That seems like a tedious thing to do for all changes, but perhaps is useful for changes where there is disagreement.
Thanks -- Jeremy Hylton —Preceding comment was added at 23:02, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
The main point, in my mind, of mentioning Haskell as an influence is more about its influence on itertools than on listcomps. Raymond Hettinger explicitly studied the Haskell prologue to evaluate which itertools were important to support. But perhaps we do not mention Haskell's influence in the best way or context (let me go look again). LotLE× talk 05:39, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
I am adding a link to my website where I show how to install Python on Windows Vista. It is not intuitive and I think it is a useful addition to this page. ( Neuralwiki ( talk) 04:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC))
For the data type str and unicode it says it's "An immutable sequence of characters". I'm not a python expert but this seems incorrect to me. You can definitely change a string or unicode. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.61.6.82 ( talk) 21:20, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
>>> s = "foo" >>> id(s) 3792352 >>> s = s+"bar" >>> id(s) 3792320
LotLE× talk 04:40, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
I wonder if I'm "David" in 76.87..'s comment (it's my name, but not my username; not hard to figure out though). In any case, the example really does show immutability, even in an FP sense. The point is that the object whose id is 3792353 can never be anything other than "foo" (during that interpreter run; of course that id might be used for something else during a different run). 's' happens to be a way to refer to object 3792352. If nothing refers to that object, it will be garbage collected at some point too. But I might also refer to object 3792352 in other ways, e.g. (I don't even have to fake id's since as an implementation accident, ids are just hashes of strings, more-or-less):
>>> s = "foo" >>> id(s) 3792352 >>> s2 = s >>> l = [s] >>> s = s+"bar" >>> s
'foobar'
>>> id(s), id(l[0]), id(s2) (3792384, 3792352, 3792352)
LotLE× talk 18:26, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
[~]$ python Python 2.4.2 (#1, Mar 22 2006, 18:15:19) [GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 5250)] on darwin Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> n = 1234 >>> id(n) 25180820 >>> m = 2345 >>> id(m) 25180796 [~]$ python Python 2.4.2 (#1, Mar 22 2006, 18:15:19) [GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 5250)] on darwin Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> m = 2345 >>> n = 1234 >>> id(n), id(m) (25180820, 25180796)
Hmm, more confusion, at least as far as Python is concerned. Python immutability is not a property of variable names; a variable can (more or less) always be rebound. Python immutability is a property of data objects, and has to do with whether their contents can be altered in place.
>>> nums = [1, 2, 3] >>> nums[0] 1 >>> nums[0] = 42 >>> nums [42, 2, 3] >>> wiki = "Wikipedia" >>> wiki[0] 'W' >>> wiki[0] = "P" Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in ? TypeError: object does not support item assignment
As you can see, the array in the variable nums
can have its contents altered, but the string in the variable wiki
cannot. However, it's perfectly legal to rebind the variable to a whole new value:
>>> wiki = 42 >>> wiki = nums >>> wiki = "Wikipedia" >>> wiki = wiki + wiki >>> wiki 'WikipediaWikipedia'
This is likewise what's going on in the above s = s + "bar"
example. A new string object is being conjured up by the s + "bar"
expression, and then the variable s
is pointed to that object. The string it previously pointed to may perhaps be garbage-collected, since it does not share structure with the new one. --
FOo (
talk)
10:11, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
The colon serves no useful purpose in the syntax parsing of the language. Why is it then required by the parser? It inhibits the natural expression of logic as part of program flow by adding a nonsensical characters for block delineation. See the following links for a discussion of the issue, [7] [8]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.142.120.234 ( talk) 07:39, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Since JASC software was bought out by Corel, which proceeded to dismantle Paint Shop Pro (turning it into a mere photo editor), the existing reference (currently {41}) to it found in paragraph titled "Usage" no longer applies. Should that reference be omitted?
If so, can someone explain to me how Wikipedia handles the references number sequences and resequencing? Does everything get automatically renumbered without skipping any number, or would omission/deletion, leave a gap in the numerical series? KnowBuddy ( talk) 17:04, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
A poem circulated in the module 'this':
"The Zen of Python, by Tim Peters
Beautiful is better than ugly.
Explicit is better than implicit.
Simple is better than complex.
Complex is better than complicated.
Flat is better than nested.
Sparse is better than dense.
Readability counts.
Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules.
Although practicality beats purity.
Errors should never pass silently.
Unless explicitly silenced.
In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess.
There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it.
Although that way may not be obvious at first unless you're Dutch.
Now is better than never.
Although never is often better than *right* now.
If the implementation is hard to explain, it's a bad idea.
If the implementation is easy to explain, it may be a good idea.
Namespaces are one honking great idea -- let's do more of those!"
Why not include this in the Philosophy section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.14.43 ( talk) 15:16, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi,
I don't think this revert is appropriate, especially given the rationale.
Given that it isn't disputed that Python is high-level, but it is disputed that it's very high-level, I reckon we should just use high-level. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Chris that it should be high-level programming language rather than very high-level programming language. Martinelli's work is an excellent Python reference, and I don't detract from it. But Martinelli is a known Python advocate, and advocacy is not an objective of a Wikipedia article. There's no question that Python is high-level, but "very high-level" is getting more into areas of opinion.
Lulu, your work on this article is appreciated, but being a long-standing editor does not bestow any particular weight to your views. I know you're very protective of this article, but this might be a good time for you to re-read WP:OWN. TJRC ( talk) 18:24, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Solution: extend the VHLL article? Since the current VHLL article on Wikipedia is a stub (and the ACM articles require a subscription), it would be a great help if you experts ( David , Chris and TJRC) could work together to get it into a generally useful state, e.g. so that non-expert software development readers can appreciate the criteria that distinguish VHLLs, HLLs, 4GLs etc. Once that groundwork is in place, it might be appropriate to add sub-sections to show why Python, Ruby &c should be regarded as VHLLs. Any debate could then take place on the VHLL talk page, which would provide a better context for the discussion. Does that work for you? - Pointillist ( talk) 23:07, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
In the Usage section, this is said:
AFAIK, as a long-time Slackware user, Slackware does not use Anaconda. However, not being a Slackware guru, I'm uncomfortable with taking definitive action over this matter. I mean, it would take some work to merge Anaconda into Slackware to make this statement true :D
But seriously, if nobody disagrees within a couple days or so, I guess I'll remove Slackware from that list.-- I80and ( talk) 13:34, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Is that snake logo official? According to the creator of Python, the programming language Python does not relate to the snake, but to the Monty python flying circus. The logo should therefore be a big fot IMO. -- Malin Randstrom ( talk) 07:32, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
I came across a good non-trivial code sample on the German Wikipedia, an implementation of quicksort. See de:Python_(Programmiersprache).
def quicksort(liste):
if len(liste) <= 1:
return liste
pivotelement = liste0
links = element for element in liste1:] if element < pivotelement
rechts = element for element in liste1:] if element >= pivotelement
return quicksort(links) + pivotelement + quicksort(rechts)
Perhaps I'm not looking hard enough, but I don't see an obvious place to put it. I'm also not entirely sure what I need to do GFDL-wise to import the code sample here. Karl Dickman talk 21:02, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
The opening paragraph doesn't mention that Python is also a scripting language. Isn't it? Like scripting languages, it's more interpreted than compiled, it's often used to direct other applications, and allows for unstructured use. Without something of the sort added to the opening, it makes Python sound no better than C or C++, which are also "general purpose high-level programming languages". -- A D Monroe III ( talk) 13:55, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Trouble is, "scripting language" is a problematic expression. Python is sometimes used for scripting, but it's also used for applications. It certainly isn't a systems language -- you wouldn't write device drivers in it -- but the notion that every language is either "systems" or "scripting" is a false dichotomy.
As for "interpreted", that's also problematic. CPython is a bytecode compiler and virtual machine. (You can get native-code compilation with Psyco, or by using Jython (to generate Java bytecode) and a native-code Java compiler.) Python is never an "interpreter" in the classic sense of a program that converts source code to an abstract syntax tree and runs the program by walking the tree, like eval in freshman Lisp interpreters.
Yes, people often use "interpreter" to mean the Python interactive console, but that's a bit of a solecism. If you define "interpreter" that way, then Python has an interpreter but Perl doesn't -- even though both use the same execution strategy under the hood. (Using "interpreter" to mean "interactive console" also pisses off the Lisp folks, who will point out that SBCL compiles everything to machine code, even expressions you type in interactively.)
The usual expression these days for the class of languages including Python, Perl, and Ruby seems to be "dynamic language". -- FOo ( talk) 18:25, 5 October 2008 (UTC)