[racket] Fundamentals

From: Shriram Krishnamurthi (sk at cs.brown.edu)
Date: Wed Oct 13 23:59:07 EDT 2010

> As long as the processor can only read only numbers (binary), Racket
> cannot be interpreted by the machine before being translated into
> another language such as Assembly. Assembly is then translated to
> numbers or binary/machine code If that is the case, Racket has to be
> an interpreted language since it is layered on Assembly. Or I may
> just be completely wrong in my perception of that part.

The phrase "interpreted language" has no meaning; it's nonsensical.
If you start from there, you won't get to any place sensible.  (Others
have been trying to say this to you, but less directly, so you may be
missing their point.  Hopefully now it's unavoidable.)

> How can those researched numbers be random? It can only LOOK random,
> but not ACTUALLY random. Right?

Correct.  Hence they are called "pseudo-random numbers".


Posted on the users mailing list.