Can terms "interpreter" and "processor" be used interchangably?
Usually, an interpreter is defined in computing terms: it executes instructions by issuing instructions to some lower level of processing. A processor is defined in physical terms: it executes instructions in electronic circuits. It's an interpreter if its behavior is ultimately defined by computer scientists, and a processor if its behavior is ultimately defined by physicists.

There's an exception: if the interpreter is defined in terms of emulating something that would normally be a physical processor, it's called a processor.

But it's only a matter of terminology. There's no profound distinction here. Just go with the flow.


Mu. It's an interpreted machine language. Many processors work that way anyway (where do you draw the line between instruction decoding and interpretation? why would you want to draw a line?).
Mu. It's a processor, and the processor is interpreted.
Mu. If you posit that the language is interpreted then by definition it's interpreted by an interpreter. The interpreter may be a processor.