All of those complaints are from the quote.<p>1) All the more reason not to introduce incorrect terminology; non-technical people won't be able to understand that it's wrong.<p>3) There <i>are</i> legitimate definitions of "scripting languages"; the one I use is that a scripting language is not useful without 3rd-party code. The Bourne shell and JavaScript are classic examples of scripting languages.<p>QuakeC is a scripting language which isn't executed in line order.<p>4) Values are procedures (PHP doesn't have functions; the keyword is mis-named), classes, or variables. They do not have to be declared before use in PHP -- if they did, writing mutually-recursive procedures would be impossible in PHP.<p>5) I see nothing "obvious" about your statement. They state that compiling results in a separate file, which is wrong because some compilers don't.<p>6) JavaScript (in all popular implementations), Python, JVM languages (Java, Scala), .NET languages (C#, F#, VB.NET), Perl 6. I think even Ruby has a bytecode compiler, now.<p>7) There is no indication that this new PHP implementation compiles to native executables.<p>8) Their claim is that compilation makes execution faster. There exist cases where compilation does not make execution faster. Therefore, their claim is incorrect.<p>9) Their quote states that compiled binaries don't have to be read from beginning to end to execute. This is incorrect. When a binary is executed, or a library linked, it is loaded entirely into memory.