interpreter
Machine language is a stream of bytes interpreted by the CPU to perform operations on the computer. Reading machine language directly requires knowledge of or access to a list of "opcodes" (the numeric value associated with each instruction) in the program. Assembly language is a human-readable translation of machine language with additional features such as mapping of symbols to actual memory addresses or registers. People who use assembly language ultimately also become proficient in understanding machine language.For example, in the x86 architecture, this machine language:B8 05 00is represented in assembly language as: mov ax, 5It is clear for someone who understands the assembly language that the instruction will move the immediate value "5" into the register "ax."
There is very little difference, functionally, between assembly language and machine level language. Each assembly language statement corresponds to one machine instruction. The difference is in readability (who wants to read and write in hex code?) and in ease of address computation.
The primary difference between them goes like this:A compiler takes the program code you've written and processes it into native machine code. Once this process is completed, you end up with a compiled object that can be further processed into a complete executable program. This compiled program is separate from the source code you still possess: completely in machine-native code. Since it's been hard-set with the instructions it has to do, compiled programs are fast, but they can't be changed without recompiling them.An interpreter takes the program code you've written and walks through it, step by step, handling each instruction on the fly: as it goes. The interpreter does all the machine-related stuff. It must keep reading the source code throughout the procedure since it does not produce a machine-native program from the source. Interpreted programs are easy to edit and adjust since there are no intervening steps between code writing and execution, but the very nature of instruction interpretation and having to deal with syntactical nuances every time the program is run tends to slow down the execution.Perhaps the best real-world way to relate the difference is to picture yourself holding two different sets of instructions. One set is instructions on how to do a task. In this case, you're interpreting the instructions and doing the job yourself. The other set is instructions on how to build (compile) a machine to do the same task. Now you're compiling the instructions into a separate final object (the machine) that can now do the same job on its own. The pros and cons are evident here as well. As an interpreter, it's easy enough for you to alter the instructions so as to do something else. But once the machine is compiled, its function can't be changed. You'll need to alter the instructions and build a new machine.
Pseudocode is more a process description than actual code. Since it is just describing the logic and processes of a proposed program it can be written in ANY written language, note that while it could theoretically be written in a "computer language", that sort of defeats the purpose of the pseudo code which intended for human reading rather than machine reading.
FILE* fopen(<filename>, <mode>); E.g., FILE* f = fopen("C:\\Users\\<user_name>\\My Documents\\data_file.dat", "rb"); Opens the specified file for reading ("r") in binary mode ("b").
Are you asking about an "interpreter"? That's part of a computer language that reads a line of code and breaks it down into machine code. The Interpreter works with one source statement at a time, reading it, translating itto machine-level instructions, executing the resulting binary instructions, and then moving on to the next source statement. Almost no real interpreters generate any machine code, they simply interpret the source code and directly do what it says using machine code built into the interpreter when it was originally written. Machine code is generated by compilers, to permit repeated execution without having to reload the compiler each time (as one must with an interpreter).
Developmental reading is a systematic instruction in reading skills strategies that includes spelling and pronounciation.
Teaching Reading K-2 - 2002 Differentiating Instruction was released on: USA: 20 October 2003
reading instruction for elementary students
Based on the information in this reading passage, what did Pip think of the man's last statement?It was rude A+
Patricia A. Heron has written: 'Reading Russian' -- subject(s): Russian language, Science, Technology, Translating, Translating into English 'A concise German-English grammar dictionary' -- subject(s): English, German language, Grammar, Textbooks for foreign speakers, Translating into English
Teaching Reading K-2 - 2002 Using Assessment to Guide Instruction was released on: USA: 27 October 2003
Beverly B. Tyner has written: 'Small-group reading instruction' -- subject(s): Group reading, Remedial teaching, Reading, Reading (Elementary)
The word you are looking for is "literacy." Literacy refers to the ability to read and write, as well as the instruction and knowledge related to these skills.
No. It's a reading machine not a writing machine.
Douglas P. Barnard has written: 'Selecting a basal reading program' -- subject(s): Basal reading instruction, Books and reading, Children, Reading (Elementary)
Albert J. Harris has written: 'Readings on reading instruction' -- subject(s): Collections, Reading (Elementary) 'How to increase reading ability'