Should have read something like a scripting language vs. compiled language.  That's how that definition should have come across.  Totally messed that definition up.

I end up typing something and by the time I get to the end I forget the intent of what I am typing  .

well, i think we're trying to find the theory of everything here. the one formula that describes the whole universe (of programming). practically seen the words were made up years ago and do not have the same meaning anymore. like low and high level language for instance. a dotnet (virtual) machine has msil as low level language, this language is typesafe and is object oriented though. provides full support for scope visibility, garbage collection, etc... is that low level???

now scripting vs programming. it used to be glossaries, macro's and scripting were automation "scripts" that would execute a chain of tasks in a system. this could have limited programming features with it. today however with scripting languages like javascript you have an almost full blown OO language which delivers features that .net doesn't even have (superclassing). it is like dotnet, compiled to intermediate code (jit compiled) and then executed at a speed comparable to a java application. jes javascript even has reflection... now i ask you, is that a scripting language???

now having explaind that any simple definition is not valid since it can never match the past and the current situations, today the closest definition to a scripting language is i.m.h.o.

"a language that is not compile time type checked and a language that runs directly from it's source code. (compiling + executing in 1 go or interpreting)"

this is however a very poor definition since the origional basic languages would be a scripting languages with this definition, it is the closest (simple) match though that i can think of.

well f0dder you might be technically correct that in 2007,

Also, compiled doesn't necessarily mean "machine code" - think java, dotNET, perl/parrot et cetera.
Scripting languages can be compiled rather than interpreted, and traditional compiled languages can be interpreted as well (though not very fun for something like C++).

but i think the general flavor of the concepts, and the historical background is that when you talk about compiled, you are really implying that a substantial amount of work and a dedicated step is taking place to convert the code to a very highly optimized (usually machine code or close) version.  modern languages are blurring that a bit, but thats the point.

now there have always been interpretted programming languages.  and today's autohotkey "scripting language" is more powerful that the original hardcore full on programming languages so things get a bit confusing.

but when you say a scripting language you usually mean an interpreted thing (or something that "feels" interpreted, ie instantly runnable) that can be written and tested and run with very little turn around. in general i think people talk about a "scripting language" solution to a problem as a kind of quick and dirty solution, in a language that is much more forgiving and tends to be aimed more torwards experimenting and instant feedback, and where runtime speed and memory usage is not critical, vs the idea of getting together a team for a month with UML diagrams to plan out the objects, classes, and data structures.

any simple definition is not valid since it can never match the past and the current situations.

That is probably the only 100% accurate statement made in this thread as most are a percentage of an opinion.

Its just such a hard thing to define.

I'm a little bit late here, but I'll go out on a limb and say that even HTML/CSS is programming, though a radically different kind.

If you've done templates before, or worked with higher requirements for HTML display, then you'd probably agree that HTML/CSS is still "programming". It's not easy when you start trying to match correct display for Trident, Gecko, and other engines. Especially for CSS 2.

It might be more accurate to say "coding" instead of "programming", but either way, it's all just one big fuzzy ball of different kinds of code.

This reminds me of how all the C guys used to squint and look down on the VB guys. That has kind of changed now with languages like Python and others like it where they typing is much looser. There are certain advantages that you get there that aren't available in C without a massive amount of programming/coding.

e.g.

// Create a variable to hold an int
var myVar1;
myVar1 = 3
myVar1 = 3 + 8;

// Create a variable to hold a string
var myVar2 = "Hello!";
myVar2 = myVar2 + " My name is var!";

// The following block would throw an error because myVar1 has been cast as an int and myVar2 as a string:
var myVar3 = myVar1 + myVar2;

So at the end of the day, it seems to me that writing "code" is still some form of "programming". You're writing a set of instructions. That's about it.

Unless we want to start telling the Python guys that they're not "real programmers" because Python isn't strongly typed, etc... Doesn't seem very reasonable to me.

(OK - that was a huge jump in logic there, but I'm just a bit too lazy to go through it right now... )

another organization question.. code? script? programming? lol depends on the thinker.

To me the key concept is problem solving, creativity and using/inventing standard data structures and algorithms. If you do that you're programming, the language/environment doesn't matter.

Scripting is much narrower in scope

e.g.
A function in c# to read a file using std library calls its akin to a script.
A jscript function that then finds unique patterns in that file is a program.

kakarukeys, I'd say you're pretty much right but I'd remove the need for object oriented constructs. All a language need to be able to do is manipulated some sort of data and that's enough.

Though quoting Wikipedia is dubious it's article on Programming language gets right to the heart of the matter. The simple fact is that scripting and programming are the same thing. And HTML is not a scripting language

You know, this is really good practice for arguing about...

Ford and Chevy

As a courtesy for any non-USA residents that may not understand this here is a little background.

Ford and Chevrolet ("Chevy") are major manufacturers of automobiles in the USA and elsewhere.  Given attitude in human nature of "mine is better," long-standing rivalries developed between Ford and Chevy owners about which is better.  Every year there was some racing big shot bragging about how their "Ford" was faster than all the "Chevies" only to be beaten by a Chevy the next year, yada, yada, yada. 

The fact that this battle still rages on simply means that neither brand was "better."  They were (are?) both good cars.

I have driven and owned both and the only real difference I ever noted, besides styling, was that one cranked the window down with a clockwise motion and the other with a counter-clockwise rotation.  When I was a young stallion and owned a Ford, Ford was "Boss!"  When I owned a Chevrolet, my Chevy was King of the Road.  When I owned an older Honda Civic, I had fun!
A friend called it a "pregnant roller-skate" since it was so small, but I had a blast with that little car! 

The only useful reason I can see for even going through this exercise is to eliminate ambiguity when someone says, "program" or "script."  This gets everyone on the same page and eliminates any confusion which enhances productivity.  It should also reduce stress. 

Given this is something of a quasi "Ford and Chevy" debate, perhaps we might be able to simplify it, just for convenience (and our sanity).  After reading and rereading this series of posts I see one common thread.  So, I submit the following...

If it is a list (series or parallel) of coded instructions which uses "variables" (volatile locations in RAM that can be changed, directly or indirectly, by the programmer's action it is a "Programming" language, regardless of whether it is "compiled" or "interpreted."

If it is a list series (series or parallel) of coded instructions which does not use "variables" (volatile locations in RAM that can be changed, directly or indirectly, by the programmer's action) it is a "Scripting" language, regardless of whether it is "compiled" or "interpreted."

I know I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer here, but I don't get what all the hub-bub is about? 

vimscript: let myvar="hello world"

So what about application scripting then? Is it "application programming" for you?

The norms being that the term "scripting" suggests quick or brief coding.

This is the first time I actually hear this definition. Quick coding is Q&D.  
You can as well develop a C++ application quickly.