>>9 >The Strongest Language In The World That would be C
Name:
Anonymous2017-06-30 17:26
>>12 Um, no it's not. C and C based languages are a cancer brought on programming.
Name:
Anonymous2017-06-30 23:04
>>13 Why did the universities teach them? That never made any sense to me. C became popular through the universities even though it went against every single one of their beliefs about what a good programming language should be, not through industry. Pascal and Java also became popular through universities, but a lot of professors thought Pascal was good. It never made sense why these universities teaching Smalltalk, Simula 67, and Eiffel would suddenly switch to proprietary Java to teach OOP either.
Because it's lower level than the other languages.
No, it has pointers and it's not the only language with pointers. It's different because it lacks higher level concepts, which requires people to make scripting languages and other crap instead of using the language directly.
Pascal was made to be an introductory language for teaching students.
That's why it didn't make any sense to replace it with C.
It's an OOP language, and very much in demand.
Java wasn't in demand when they were teaching Smalltalk and Eiffel. OOP was in demand, but not Java. The new generation of students who graduated knowing Java created the demand for Java.
How exactly do you teach low level concepts with Pascal?
Low-level depends a lot on the hardware. Mental midgets (good choice of words) can't envision running on more advanced hardware like the iAPX 432 because C causes brain damage. On that kind of hardware, there would be a very different view of what low-level means. There's no such thing as generic ``systems programming''. People are afraid to make anything that can't run C.
Yes, but the C syntax made it more appealing to them.
The C syntax made it more appalling to them. You're assuming most people who learned Java at the university were C programmers or liked C or C++ and that they like them because of the syntax. I think Java turned people off of programming, or at least statically typed compiled (it compiles to bytecode) languages. Why do you think there was this huge explosion in scripting languages? I don't even have a JVM on my computer, but systems tools on GNU/Linux are written in Python.
You're assuming most people who learned Java at the university were C programmers or liked C or C++
no, it sounds more like they thought it'd be easier for them to learn if both syntaxes were related
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-01 17:15
>>20 sounds more like a software engineering thing than computer science everyone knows mental midgets prefer computer science
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-02 3:09
>>21 That's mental midget thinking. ``I'm going to use the syntax of a weakly typed language designed for pointers and pointer arithmetic as the basis of an object-oriented type-safe language.'' C's insanely bad for and switch can't even be blamed on that (contrast BLISS). This is because of the laziness and small brains of the C creators, and has nothing to do with the hardware or compiler size or speed.
no it's not, C syntax is pretty easy to understand and using a similar one for both languages makes it easier for them to learn both Whether the language is good or bad is irrelevant
lisp fizzbuzz: (defun fizzbuzz () (loop for x from 1 to 100 do (princ (cond ((zerop (mod x 15)) "FizzBuzz") ((zerop (mod x 3)) "Fizz") ((zerop (mod x 5)) "Buzz") (t x))) (terpri)))
Algol syntax was used as pseudocode since the 60's and will not go away. C is just a modern algol, a lingua franca for expressing algorithms.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-02 13:10
>>26 C is actually a modern way of making shrunken heads, mind-crippling instead of mind-expanding. When you read the Algol Bulletin[1], you will understand the difference. The first thing on AB33.3.3 is about functional composition with closures. The idea came from mathematics, not from another programming language. Mental giants, with knowledge of Fortran, Algol, Cobol, RPG, IPL, Lisp, and mathematics, created languages like Simula 67, Algol 68, PL/I, and CPL.
The people who made them used their brains to create something new by synthesizing and improving ideas, instead of poorly copying from other languages. Modern languages took so many things from PL/I and Simula 67 that most of them wouldn't be Turing complete or even usable for writing programs if you removed them all. That includes Common Lisp too.
C mental midgets looked at Simula 67, Smalltalk, Eiffel, Scheme, and Mesa, and created Java 1.0. Brendan Eich was also influenced by Scheme and Self when making JavaScript. This is because syntax and control structures are important for making a good language. If you copy from C, you get crap.
From what I know about their work on strongly typed capability-based machines[2][3] and how C can't run on them, I think these people would prefer it if we were stuck using BASIC, which could run on that hardware. C can't be a ``modern Algol'' when it's not even what Algol people would consider good in 1960. It's incredibly dishonest to say that a group that was writing garbage collectors in 1970[4] would want us using C in 2017. It's like calling C a modern Haskell. In fact, one of the Algol people said that Haskell is the modern Algol[5]. If you mentioned Fortran, COBOL, BASIC or some other language, I would have posted examples from them too. They are different from Algol but not like C either. People like to call Java a ``new COBOL'' and that's just as offensive to the COBOL programmers and creators. I respect these languages and the people who made them because they are good and had an influence on languages I like, which have nothing to do with C at all.
Mental Giants somehow lost all their market share to two C hackers with portable assembler. C clearly had superior qualities if we don't have Algol compilers shilled on every corner(but Cobol,Fortran,Ada,Lisp do). Algol lost badly to C, get over it.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-03 6:27
>>27 what was so great about COBOL that you think allowed higher-level, mathematical thinking? the only real interesting ideas I see there are English-like syntax and decimal arithmetic. unfortunately, its readability made it the prime language for uneducated code monkeys and its slow evolution and inadequate control flow structures made it the prime language for generating spaghetti code.
>>29 They may be mental giants, but most C programmers are mental midgets.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-03 8:55
>>31 As a "mental midget". I prefer to not spend my mental resources on fighting compilers. I don't want to think of zeptohistomorphisms inside monads, i don't want to construct and debug continuations. I want to write simple stuff right now and forget about it. I don't write programs just for the sake of some theoretical purity, i want to get stuff done. If i need to write thousands of lines of mind-numbingly simple C code, i'd choose it over cryptic one-liner function composition. I don't like to think over every single letter and operator, just write down algorithms fast. It seems to be less productive for higher-level languages, but writing text isn't the bottleneck in programming - the bottleneck is translating mental models to code.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-03 9:00
>>32 ..as example:APL programs are very terse but much slower to write down, verify and debug.
I want to write simple stuff right now and forget about it.
This is how spaghetti code is created
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-03 9:17
>>34 Spaghetti code is when you create complex code with indirect jumps. I don't write such stuff, i write simple and easy to debug code. When you have such code, its easy to transform/optimize it later. When you write spaghetti code, you can't transform/optimize it, since its monolithic.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-03 9:27
>>35 *That of course doesn't applies to the code that use macros.
i'd choose it over cryptic one-liner function composition.
It's not cryptic if you write it yourself.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-03 10:34
>>37 The idea is you read code much more often than writing it. Your clever hacks, macros and operator soup which requires finer understanding of their composition, either slows down comprehension or looks totally incomprehensible after few weeks. If you have to publish code, you have to keep it dumbed-down and easy to read. APL is a prime example where code become write-only easily.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-03 11:26
>>38 APL can easily fall into the 'too clever' camp because it focuses on terseness, but terseness is not the same as high-level abstractions. classic functional programming ideas like map/filter/reduce are all about using high-level abstractions like higher-order functions and yet they don't make code harder to understand. 'high-level abstractions' doesn't mean 'code golf'
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-03 11:50
>>39 its the same as if APL operators were written more verbosely. It adds cognitive load and requires to decode interactions of tokens. >classic functional programming ideas like map/filter/reduce These are just limited versions of for loops, i have no problem with them. I'm talking about Haskell:lazy eval, monads, and functions composed like https://stackoverflow.com/questions/12659951/how-does-this-piece-of-obfuscated-haskell-code-work fix$(<$>)<$>(:)<*>((<$>((:[{- thor's mother -}])<$>))(=<<)<$>(*)<$>(*2))$1
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-03 11:54
In fact, one of the Algol people said that Haskell is the modern Algol[5].
>>40 this is intentionally obfuscated, of course it's not readable. in general, haskell can be readable but I agree with you that the community is too focused on complex category theory bullshit that's not really relevant to actual programming.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-03 12:53
>>29 C creators are mental midgets because they brought back the buffer overflow and other already solved problems[1], and made it impossible to port programs to capability-based computers, which really do work as well as the hype. This was like bringing back smallpox.
Mental Giants somehow lost all their market share to two C hackers with portable assembler. C clearly had superior qualities
Lisp, Smalltalk, Self, and Ruby Mental Giants somehow lost all their market share to one browser hacker who made a scripting language in 10 days. JavaScript clearly had superior qualities.
we don't have Algol compilers shilled on every corner(but Cobol,Fortran,Ada,Lisp do).
The ideas of Algol 60, except for call by name, have been inherited by Pascal, PL/I, Ada, and Fortran 90, so there is not really any more use for Algol 60. There is no more Algol 68 because the people are into Haskell now. I learned about Algol because of my respect for Ada and other languages I like, and wanting to learn about where they came from, instead of being told that these C and UNIX hackers are God's gift to programming and everything their small minds don't understand is ``bloat''. The low quality of C is why some believe that everything else from the 1970s had to be bad too, and is not worth learning. Once you remove that mental block and free your mind, you will be able to understand the brilliance of these mental giants.
Algol lost badly to C, get over it.
You can build this kind of thing for any strongly typed language. Microsoft tried with Singularity, but that's software instead of hardware. C and C++ are the only languages that can't run on these systems. Buffer overflows would be gone forever, programming would be a lot easier, and the OS would be higher level. Maybe a cure for cancer would be a better analogy than eradicating smallpox.
Unfortunately, the one language Ten15 could not support was C, since C is not adequately typed, and this - in the era of C's rising dominance - was a big reason for Ten15's downfall. Ten15 was seen as being increasingly marginalized by everyone's desire to run C, and increasingly C++, programs. This is somewhat ironic given the recent proliferation and popularity of perl, python, ruby, Java, C#, etc, all of which would have mapped nicely onto Ten15.
>>30 COBOL introduced character and string handling, records, and precisions to programming. The importance of strings and records in programming is obvious. If you know anything about Ada, you would know that the programmer, not the compiler writer, specifies the precision of data types. The Ada concept came from Pascal and PL/I but the overall idea originated in COBOL. This is what mental giants do. They see how you specify numbers in COBOL with decimals and how the compiler automatically scales them, and are able to envision a grander idea, fixed-point arithmetic.
Lisp, Smalltalk, Self, and Ruby Mental Giants somehow lost all their market share to one browser hacker who made a scripting language in 10 days. JavaScript clearly had superior qualities.
dude what are you talking about? none of those other than javascript are web scripting languages and netscape's javascript is definitely not the same as the one in use now.
If most programmers are "mental midgets": why would you shill Haskell everywhere and stuff monads,endofunctors and homomorphisms It would make more sense to appeal with simpler abstractions like in >>39 map/filter/reduce than stuff category theory into everyone brain. "mental midgets" btw built up the software stack haskell runs on: the haskell runtime, compiler, OS, libc. From the academic ivory tower their work is beneath juddling lambdas on the stacks and far below monad tranforming wizards they deem themselves as. I
>>45 The people who were pushing it are into Haskell, so there is no shilling anymore. They're shilling Haskell now, or maybe Ada if they're talking about systems languages.
Haskell can do everything Algol 68 can and much more. I think it would be good to have Algol compilers because people should choose languages that work for them instead of this monopoly where everyone is adding half-baked ideas to C and C++. I also think universities should teach COBOL because disrespectful shrunken heads want to replace it with Java because they don't understand the point of COBOL. They think Java is better because it has garbage collection and classes.
>>48 Haskell on hardware can work[1]. The Haskell library is shaped by UNIX, but the people of the past believed high-level languages should shape operating system and hardware design.
>>50 because monads as a concept are pretty useful (and not that hard to understand when you learn by practice instead of focusing on formal definitions). as bad as Java's Optional<?> and stream API are, they're better than not having them.
on the other hand, I doubt that there will be any sort of push to implement homomorphic dependent multidimensional antidisestablishmentarian type abiogenesis in cyclical LGBT calculus categories.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-04 6:54
>homomorphic dependent multidimensional antidisestablishmentarian type abiogenesis in cyclical LGBT calculus Trivially this reduces to higher-order polymorphic lambda calculus operating on lexical monads
I MEAN ITS A LITTLE SPOT NOT LIKE IT RUINED MY CHAIR R NYTHING LOL BUT FOR REAL EPIC LULZ HIGH FIVES XDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
WHATA FUCK MAN xD i just fall of my chair cuz i couldnt and i CANT stop laugh xDXDXDXDXDDDDDDDDDDDDXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD OMGOSH DDDDDXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD DDDDDD LOOOOOOOOOLLLLL THIS IS A SHIT XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDXDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD A BIG ONE XDDDDDDDD A GRAT ONE XXXXXXDDDD CONGRATS MAN XD U FRUSTRATED U FRUSTRATED BRO U SO MAD WHY ARE YOU SO MAAAAD I CAN POST ANYTHING I WANT THAT IS HOW IT SAYS IN THE RULES I DONT CARE ABOUT YOUR FAGGOTRY RULES Y SO MAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD
WHATA FUCK MAN xD i just fall of my chair cuz i couldnt and i CANT stop laugh xDXDXDXDXDDDDDDDDDDDDXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD OMGOSH DDDDDXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD DDDDDD LOOOOOOOOOLLLLL THIS IS A SHIT hgXDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDXDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD A BIG ONE XDDDDDDDD A GRAT ONE XXXXXXDDDD CONGRATS MAN XD
WHATA FUCK MAN xD i just fall of my chair cuz i couldnt and i CANT stop laugh
running on more advanced hardware like the iAPX 432
U MENA slow as fuck hardware
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-05 16:29
>>67 The UNIX head shrinkers create ``college-educated'' people who lost their desire to learn and their respect for mental giants who paved the way with better technology than we use today. These are the same brain-damaged idiots who say RISC-V is faster because it doesn't do overflow checking. These idiots were pooh-poohing memory-mapped files and virtual machines as ``bloat'', and now they use them all the time while pretending they never had a problem with them. If they were code monkeys, we would just laugh at their stupidity, but they are professors and other university faculty, teaching this to students.
The brilliant iAPX 432 was influenced by work at Carnegie-Mellon University[1] in the 1970s. What does Carnegie-Mellon teach now? They created the brain-damaged and non-standard C0 language[2] to teach ``Principles of Imperative Computation'' (read: C-specific quirks and flaws, with training wheels to make it more like Pascal) instead of standard well-designed languages like Ada, which incidentally was the language for which the iAPX 432 was created. This collapse in civilization is something out of Planet of the Apes.
and by a gift from Google for the development of CMU's introductory undergraduate courses.
Perhaps they want to create more C code monkeys to work on their monopoly Android system[3].
>>71 Sure, but the real question here is do C code monkeys write Java.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-06 19:09
>>72 Well since code monkeys care about careers, the answer is probably. The syntax and the fact it's C-based makes it easier too
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-06 19:36
>>73 How does C-based syntax make it easier, when it's badly designed brain-damaged crap? You keep assuming that these university students already know and like C instead of having it forced down their throats by these professors who say it's ``the standard'' and ``what code looks like.''
That really doesn't matter. It's used to teach OOP concepts, which it does well.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-07 3:44
>>76 It does not teach OOP concepts well at all. Java's brain-damaged crap ``OOP'' is why so many people think OOP is a problem. Eiffel teaches OOP concepts well, if you want to like OOP instead of hating it and thinking it's snake oil.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-07 6:00
>>77 This. In real OOP languages, all types are objects.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-07 7:25
>>78 In real functional languages, Ints are 31 bit and 1 bit reserved for garbage collection.
>>85 If ints were managed manually, why would you need "tagbits"?
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-08 5:30
To be fair, if you need integers bigger than 500 million, you should probably just be using bignums anyway.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-08 5:37
>>87 How you manage inputs, arrays and vars which may or may not exceed 500M Are they all have to trigger >>83 exception when they reach above 500M?
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-08 5:40
>be 30-bit Emacs Lisp integer >some asshole function adds a number to me >exceed 500M limit >exception triggered, lights everywhere >panic, something reaches into my value domain >tfw forcibly converted to BigNum >actually feels comfy
Java's brain-damaged crap ``OOP'' is why so many people think OOP is a problem.
False. Otherwise it wouldn't be a language to teach introductory programming.
Eiffel teaches OOP concepts well
Eiffel is also a dead language. There's virtually no useful software written in it, and its own compiler costs $500+. I've never used it, however. So I don't know how ``well'' it teaches those concepts.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-20 0:45
>>101 Eiffel is for writing real-world programs, but also happens to be the best language for teaching OOP.
Java is not good for teaching introductory programming or OOP. Can you explain why 0123 isn't the number 123 or why int and Integer are different? Java is good for causing confusion and turning students into brain-damaged zombies.
These students think they are stupid because their professors are teaching Java and all of these big companies are using Java, so the students must be the problem and they're ``bad programmers'', but they are fine and Java is the problem. Recognizing these problems is a sign that your brain is still functional.
>>104 Yeah, and there are 1,000 question on Stack Overflow about how to do "Hello, world" in Java, while there are around 5 about how to do the same thing Lisp.
Totally doesn't have anything to do with the number of programmers for each language.
haha are you serious? That may have been true when it first came out, but as soon as other OOP languages popped up, Eiffel died and now barely in use.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-20 1:57
>>105 Also the fact that Java is full of copypaste mental-midgets/artists.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-20 2:26
>>105 These questions shouldn't exist at all. Why would 08 be a syntax error? Why would 0123 not be equal to 123? They are not stupid questions, Java is a stupid language.
>>106 Eiffel is a superior OOP language. Multiple inheritance in C++ is so bad that people think multiple inheritance is bad. OOP in Java is so bad that people think OOP is bad. How about something good for a change?
>>107 These particular questions are about Java flaws that confuse people, not about copypasting. Copypasting is because nobody understands what the stupid public static void main crap means.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-20 4:09
and its own compiler costs $500+
Pretty sure that the GNU one is free.
Proper OOP is currying anyway, just use Scheme to teach OOP.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-20 6:12
>>109 >just use Scheme to teach OOP. Common Lisp is better suited to this task.
Touhous are female, which negatively correlates with programming ability. With pair programming methods, Touhous will be only a burden for a project of moderate size, although their magical abilities could add some added value in convincing potential clients. Based on their in-game performance, the touhou with best personality would be the optimal choice to maximize team synergy and scalability of social micro-networks inherent in production of high-quality frameworks and solutions, as inter-personal communications coordinator and public relations specialist.
The whole idea of a harem is ridiculous: Has anyone seen women at work? stuck dozens of bitchy, sexually frustrated(you can't f them all 24/7) women in one place and expect them to live peacefully. Its an emotional minefield. How do they prevent them killing/beating each other and/or killing the harem owner? Sexbots will be far better/safer alternative if they existed.
Name:
VIPPER2017-07-25 21:33
>>145 That's where you're wrong, kiddo. Harems have docile women. You wouldn't see that kind of scene in an actual harem
stuck dozens of bitchy, sexually frustrated(you can't f them all 24/7) women in one place and expect them to live peacefully. Its an emotional minefield. How do they prevent them killing/beating each other and/or killing the harem owner?
You wouldn't see that kind of scene in an actual harem
You actually did in the real Arabic and Ottoman harems.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-26 9:43
>>149 Nonsense. They had submissive women in those.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-26 10:36
>>150 Some women of Ottoman harem, especially wives, mothers and sisters of sultans, played very important political roles in Ottoman history, and in times it was said that the empire was ruled from harem. Hürrem Sultan (wife of Suleiman the Magnificent, mother of Selim II), was one of the most powerful women in Ottoman history.
Having grown up with German cartoons it's kinda funny seeing the word be used in the ``wrong'' way. Growing up I never thought of the harem as anything other than ``the secret place in the sultan's castle where the women live and men are not allowed to enter''. We must stop anime and unrealistic representations of foreign cultural elements from corrupting our youth.
Having grown up with German cartoons it's kinda funny seeing the word be used in the ``wrong'' way. Growing up I never thought of the harem as anything other than ``the secret place in the sultan's castle where the women live and men are not allowed to enter''.
pretty sure it's that way everywhere, though it's only in anime that it's corrupted!
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-31 4:38
>>155 Anime harems are the purest expression of love. Real harems are 3DPD breeding grounds and rape dungeons.
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-31 5:36
>>156 anime harems make for the worst possible shows
Name:
Anonymous2017-07-31 9:35
>>157 Its a common wish-fullfillment fantasy for japanese teens that anime industry exploits.
Name:
VIPPER2017-08-01 8:21
>>158 Except Japanese teens don't fantasize about having a harem of Jap women, but a harem of chinese cartoon characters.
So the anime industry is right in exploiting it
Name:
Anonymous2017-08-01 11:48
>>159 Most of the cartoon outsourcing is done by Coreans, not Chinese.
>>176 * upper class narcissist sociopath. >In her official profile, Tenshi is described as being "sheltered upbringing", selfish and top of the world.
Therefore, she lacks awareness of what it means to be a celestial.
>She is described as "delinquent". An overly privileged environment had a negative effect on her playful nature. >Due to the boring life in Heaven of constant drinking and relaxation, Tenshi decides to cause a disaster by gathering the thought energy of everyone in Gensokyo inSociopathic, partying the form of scarlet clouds, threatening an earthquake
>>204 So let Eanas lay eggs, inseminate them, then push them back into her. This solution is not only simple, it also happens to be my fetish.
Name:
Anonymous2017-12-26 11:17
I have thought about this long and hard, and I have to say... Mokou.
Name:
Anonymous2018-10-27 20:36
how are touhou games developed, /prog/? what programming language, image manipulation software, IDE does ZUN use?
Name:
Anonymous2018-10-27 23:09
>>208 Sepples, Photoshop, some combination of Visual C++ and Emacs. He also uses cygwin and has a version of void.h, named zunlib.h, as evidenced by some of the debug strings found in his released binaries. Likely some code from Amusement Makers or ponchi/pbg too. Have a look at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLqQBkhFh80&t=13m1s for a glimpse at his source tree and code, and generally the rest of the vid for features of Touhou debug builds.
