The parent is talking about the costs and benefits of AOT compilation versus the lack. Whether the interpreted language uses a JIT has nothing to do with that trade-off. That's why it's irrelevant.

Also, that the parent bothered specifying "AOT" in the first place is proof enough the entire basis of your belief in their understanding of things is utterly groundless. This would be clearer to you if you understood that JIT compilation cost is amortized, as the parent alludes, and that it doesn't happen in "a" compilation step.