In layman's terms, compiler is an application to convert the code into instructions computer can understand. In a low level language, the code is already written using low level instruction which a computer can understand. Hence there is no need for a compiler.
A compiler is a program that translates a programming language (like c++, java, pascal, php etc...) to a language that computers can "understand" (i.e. "1001010110101010...")
When writing a program, you write it in a certain language (java, C++, VB.NET etc.). For the computer to understand that, you need to convert it to computer language. That is what the compiler does.
False. A compiler converts source code into object code.
I takes a big knowledge about that compiler. The programmer should be well educated person to do with this language.
Not only can we but we have to! Machine code is the only language understood by the computer, thus all languages, both low and high level, must be converted to machine code in order to execute. Most compiled languages can produce low-level symbolic code (assembly language), but not all, especially those that compile to byte code rather than machine code. However, all code has to be compiled or interpreted to machine code at some point and machine code can be disassembled to produce low-level symbolic code.
Theoretically, yes. Practically, no.
A compiler is a program that translates a programming language (like c++, java, pascal, php etc...) to a language that computers can "understand" (i.e. "1001010110101010...")
DDL compiler is the compiler whose job is to convert high level commands to low level commands..
When writing a program, you write it in a certain language (java, C++, VB.NET etc.). For the computer to understand that, you need to convert it to computer language. That is what the compiler does.
False. A compiler converts source code into object code.
A compiler is a program that translates high-level source code into low-level machine code.
I takes a big knowledge about that compiler. The programmer should be well educated person to do with this language.
Not only can we but we have to! Machine code is the only language understood by the computer, thus all languages, both low and high level, must be converted to machine code in order to execute. Most compiled languages can produce low-level symbolic code (assembly language), but not all, especially those that compile to byte code rather than machine code. However, all code has to be compiled or interpreted to machine code at some point and machine code can be disassembled to produce low-level symbolic code.
False. HLL-programs are compiler into low level (machine code), so they aren't slower. (Programs written in interpreted languages are indeed slower than compiled programs.)
lang are convert into low level language by
The software that runs is neither--it is the binary or machine code. The binary code was generated from source code by an compiler or assembler. The source code can be written in a high or low level language or in a mixture. Most source code today is written in high-level language because it is easier to maintain and more portable. However, sometimes speed-critical sections of source code are written in low-level language such as assembly.
In contrast to a high-level language, which formats itself more to allow the programmer to understand his/her work and program flow, a low-level language formats itself in terms of a computer's or circuit's own internal structure. Rather than you saying what you want to do and letting the compiler figure out how to tell the machine what to do, you're basically telling the machine directly what to do: in its own "words," so to speak.Assembler languages are perhaps the best-known low-level languages.