"In a dynamic language like Python or Ruby I don’t have this problem at all. There is no need for a make to run my program. I just run it."

Does he think all statically typed languages are compiled-only and can't be run with an interpreter or from a REPL?

"Dynamic" has to be one of the most misleading terms in casually discussing programming languages.

http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/1562#comment-18623

Not sure whether to throw SCons into the discussion.

Misuse of "compiled". Zed fail.

I use a compiled language all day that gives me a console, no separate compile stage, etc. sigh

SBCL?

Python would be another example. It's compiled into bytecode. It could conceivably be compiled into x86 machine code on-the-fly (think Psyco). It's just hard to do, but for the same reasons a static Python compiler to assembly would be hard to do; the REPL is not making things much harder here.