[Angel Beats]

A "true" executable would be an executable with a standard PE header and native CPU instructions within it. Framework executables don't have native CPU instructions within them, so yeah, they would no longer be true executables.

How about this definition? An executable is something which can be executed.

[Wildfire]

How about this definition? An executable is something which can be executed.

For executable? Yeah, that's fine. I'm talking about true, native executables though.

---

That seems like an extremely subjective and bias definition, got any sauce 4 that?

Sure, here's something: http://stackoverflow.com/a/1542603

[meow]

I never said PHP wasn't a real language

You did though -

...languages like PHP and HTML aren't going to be used to create a virus, you need to learn an actual language...

---

I meant to imply that it's not a language meant for virus creation.

No language is "meant" for virus creation, the users take the functions/methods the language has and create a virus out of it.

---

The only context I've meant to have spoken in here is for virus creation

Then why'd you say

The context I was speaking in for a "real" language is one that can compile into an executable.

?
That would mean you're implying that all viruses are executables.. which definitely isn't the case.

---

And the reason I included Python is because through personal experience I've seen it be used for malicious purposes a lot.

I never denied or said that it's not used for malicious purposes a lot, I said it's uncommon that Python isn't interpreted in a given implementation/environment.

Would it hurt to admit that you were wrong rather than trying to bullshit your way out of this? I don't have anything against you; I just think it's annoying when people don't acknowledge their own mistakes.

[Killpot]

You did though -

---

No language is "meant" for virus creation, the users take the functions/methods the language has and create a virus out of it.

---

Then why'd you say
?
That would mean you're implying that all viruses are executables.. which definitely isn't the case.

---

I never denied or said that it's not used for malicious purposes a lot, I said it's uncommon that Python isn't interpreted in a given implementation/environment.

Would it hurt to admit that you were wrong rather than trying to bullshit your way out of this? I don't have anything against you; I just think it's annoying when people don't acknowledge their own mistakes.

I'm not trying to bullshit my way out of this, I'm acknowledging my mistakes and then refuting it again, sorry wasn't aware I not supposed to. However this conversation has carried over multiple days and my stream of conscious isn't working out very well for me. I'm keenly aware that I've said some incorrect things, not trying to deny it.

[m0dem]

I'm not trying to bullshit my way out of this, I'm acknowledging my mistakes and then refuting it again, sorry wasn't aware I not supposed to. However this conversation has carried over multiple days and my stream of conscious isn't working out very well for me. I'm keenly aware that I've said some incorrect things, not trying to deny it.

Nice reply.
Kinda smacks us all in the face.