| Aspect | Compiler | Interpreter |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose | Translates the entire program at once into machine code | Translates and executes code line-by-line |
| Steps of Programming | 1. Program Creation2. Syntax Analysis3. Compilation to Machine Code4. Linking code files5. Execution | 1. Program Creation2. No linking needed3. Executes statements one-by-one |
| Machine Code Storage | Saves machine code to disk | Does not save machine code |
| Speed of Execution | Faster execution after compilation | Slower due to real-time translation |
| Working Model | Follows Linking-Loading Model | Follows Interpretation Model |
| Output File | Generates an executable file (e.g., .exe) | No separate output file generated |
| Code Changes | Requires recompilation for any change | Changes can be tested without full retranslation |
| Error Reporting | Shows all errors after full compilation | Shows errors one at a time during execution |
| Optimization | Performs optimization ahead of execution | Limited optimization during runtime |
| Source Code Dependency | Not needed after compilation | Needed every time during execution |
| Execution Timing | Only after full compilation | Happens immediately, line-by-line |
| Analysis Time | Takes more time to analyze the entire code | Takes less time initially |
| CPU Utilization | Higher, due to intense upfront processing | Lower, as translation happens gradually |
| Use Case | Suited for Production Environments | Preferred for Development and Testing |
| Object Code | Object code is permanently saved | No object code is saved |
| Examples of Languages | C, C++, C#, Go, Rust | Python, Ruby, Perl, MATLAB, JavaScript (in some engines) |
Conclusion
Compilers and interpreters both convert high-level code to machine-understandable format but differ in how and when they do it. Compilers are better for speed and production, while interpreters are ideal for ease of debugging and learning.