picoc VS ArchWSL

and picoc, but it also features interactive shell

I would like to try this C REPL: https://github.com/jpoirier/picoc

You can. People have written an interpreter for C, and you could write a compiler for Python.

Yeah, I would not choose to learn the C-shell simply because it shares a letter with the compiled language. You might be better served learning Pike or PicoC.

But don't get caught up in the VM definition, the whole act of compiling to VM bytecode and then to native is just another step in the chain. For example here is a C interpreter that lets you do the same thing, without intermediate bytecode.

Can we please cut the bullshit. By that logic no language is compiled. Because behold, a C interpreter: https://github.com/jpoirier/picoc

Languages can have a compiler, an interpreter, or both. Just because a language is commonly thought of as 'compiled' doesn't mean you can't write an interpreter for it, or vice versa. There's even C interpreters for crying out loud https://github.com/jpoirier/picoc .

You can download Arch Linux for WSL from a third-party source like WSL Arch Linux. Follow the instructions on the GitHub page to install it.

i have archwsl but honestly there are minimal problems on windows for me so I really don't bother using wsl over just dual booting

ArchWSL

Was Arch installed with yuk7/ArchWSL tool or something else?

Don't use it anymore but used it for a number of years after WSL came out. It involved some combination of https://github.com/yuk7/ArchWSL and Xming X. Worked great.

• If you live in the linux terminal, I recommend installing WSL with a distro you like (I use arch here btw).

It uses a customized version of the Linux kernel (repo) that integrates with the host Windows OS. You can build any distro on top of that kernel, as people have done with (of course) Arch. The distro isn't any less "real" than a distro that it run on QEMU (and with a level 1 hypervisor, all systems that uses one are technically virtualized already).