On May 7, 9:20=A0pm, Erwin Moller <hi.steven...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Why is a binary file executable? Is any binary file executable? Is
> only binary file executable? Are all executable files binary? What is
> the connection between the attribute of binary and that of executable?
Calling an executable (or sometime an object) file a "binary" is more
slang than anything formal. You can take it to mean to file contains
something approximating machine code. Whether that has any relation
to anything called a "binary" file on your particular platform, or
even if your platform has anything called a "binary file," is a whole
different issue. For example, executables (and object files) on zOS
are in a structured* file format, which is not really anything to
would map conceptually to a *nix style stream type file (of either
binary or text forms). But those are still semi-commonly called
"binaries."
The term is also used with some frequency for the image files
containing the data (instructions and whatnot) intended to be burned
into a ROM or similar for embedded systems, even though those files,
for historical reasons, often actually contain ASCII hex.
Java byte code and MSIL (.NET) executables are also often called
binaries (which would fall under "approximating machine code").
*IOW, the file actually consists of independent records and other
goodies, rather than a stream of bytes.
|
