|
The best way to understand something is the C/C++.
The best way to begin writing code is C#.
The better way to write bug is VB.
Dr.Luiji
Trust and you'll be trusted.
|
|
|
|
|
Don't worry, i fixed it for you :p :
The best way to understand something is the C/C++.
The best way to begin writing code is C# or VB.NET.
The better way to write bug is VB.
|
|
|
|
|
 good answer XD
Greets
PS: I'm still laughing ^^
You often cannot figure out what computers do... But don't forget that they only do what they were told to do 
|
|
|
|
|
- Ruby (not sure why anyone would wanna use this)
- JavaScript (no tools needed)
- Scheme (taught in plenty universities)
[update] forgot these
- Ocaml
- Haskell
- Pascal
[update]
modified on Monday, April 7, 2008 9:33 AM
|
|
|
|
|
leppie wrote: - Ruby (not sure why anyone would wanna use this)
I use it everyday, good language, gets the job done.
regards,
Paul Watson
Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote: At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Watson wrote: I use it everyday, good language, gets the job done.
But how many others simply cannot use it? How many users does actually know that Ruby support continuations, and know how to use them? From what I have seen, and this is purely based on the 'Rails' concept, Ruby is very much like a tricycle with training wheels.
Although big, the Ruby community does not seem very 'stable'.
|
|
|
|
|
leppie wrote: But how many others simply cannot use it?
Cannot? Nobody is prevented from using Ruby. It works on various platforms, much like other languages. It is even gaining support in the .NET Framework.
leppie wrote: How many users does actually know that Ruby support continuations, and know how to use them?
Those that do, do and those that don't, don't. Much like other languages with certain features.
leppie wrote: From what I have seen, and this is purely based on the 'Rails' concept, Ruby is very much like a tricycle with training wheels.
I have no idea what that means? Tricycle with training wheels?
leppie wrote: Although big, the Ruby community does not seem very 'stable'.
What is unstable about it? I have been using it for 3 years now and had no "stability" problems.
regards,
Paul Watson
Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote: At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Watson wrote: I have no idea what that means? Tricycle with training wheels?
I meant it as 'very guiding' like someone holding your hand throughout.
Paul Watson wrote: What is unstable about it? I have been using it for 3 years now and had no "stability" problems.
I am sure the language is stable (and indeed very usable), I was rather referring to the user community. It always seems like there is drama
I have nothing per se against Ruby, but it seems the way it's being used and promoted it will turn into the modern day VB, albeit with a bit more style.
|
|
|
|
|
leppie wrote: It always seems like there is drama
If you mean that one rant by that one chap then... *shrug* it has nothing to do with the language and none of the Ruby user community I interact with was affected. I've seen plenty of "drama" in the C#, C++ (all that "standards" talk sure gets heated) and Java communities. Doesn't seem to stop people getting work done.
leppie wrote: I meant it as 'very guiding' like someone holding your hand throughout.
It is a high level "scripting" language. For a lot of programming you don't need a language that has a gun pointing at your foot.
regards,
Paul Watson
Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote: At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
|
|
|
|
|
leppie wrote: Scheme
There is "Lisp".
|
|
|
|
|
Scheme and Lisp is quite far apart, well since 1976. Normally Lisp would be associated with Common Lisp. The differences in variable scoping make them more different than say Java vs C#.
|
|
|
|
|
Can't say I am an expert for Lisp, but most texts agree that CL and Scheme are the two major dialects of Lisp. See here[^], for instance.
leppie wrote: more different than say Java vs C#.
That doesn't say much  Java and C# are really the same thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Machine code is the way! Let's all program in machine code again! 
To those who understand, I extend my hand.
To the doubtful I demand: Take me as I am.
Not under your command, I know where I stand.
I won't change to fit yout plan. Take me as I am.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi
01011001 11010010 11010010 10001110 00101010 OK?
|
|
|
|
|
Why not just go back to flippin switches?
|
|
|
|
|
mmm, dipswitches, drool
|
|
|
|
|
You guys are too high level. Get out the soldering gun...
|
|
|
|
|
No, I have jumper cables ready
|
|
|
|
|
Enough laugh. The point of learning machine code (or, at least, assembly language) first is that
1. You learn that, what runs software, is hardware. And hardware has physical limitations. You want an efficient program? Do your best to write an efficient implementation!
2. When you start using languages that make your life simpler (or, at least, less complicated, like C), you don't that simplicity for granted, but actually appreciate it.
To some degree, programmers who don't understand the value of low level languages remind me of users who don't understand the value of the software they use. They take it for granted and they want it to do things right (sometimes, despite the fact they have given the wrong input!!!).
To those who understand, I extend my hand.
To the doubtful I demand: Take me as I am.
Not under your command, I know where I stand.
I won't change to fit yout plan. Take me as I am.
|
|
|
|
|
I think this way of thinking makes a lot of sense. I totally agree.. BUT
Is assembly really the best choice for a NEW programmer? I think they will give up before they get anything done.
Ask not whether it is useful. Ask what it is useful for.
|
|
|
|
|
C# and Java in the same option! 
“Time and space can be a bitch.”
–Gushie, Quantum Leap
{o,o}.oO( Looking for a great RSS reader? Try FeedBeast! )
|)””’) Built with home-grown CodeProject components!
-”-”-
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, because they are essentially the same thing. :P
To those who understand, I extend my hand.
To the doubtful I demand: Take me as I am.
Not under your command, I know where I stand.
I won't change to fit yout plan. Take me as I am.
|
|
|
|
|
Bleh, from a syntax point of view maybe.
“Time and space can be a bitch.”
–Gushie, Quantum Leap
{o,o}.oO( Looking for a great RSS reader? Try FeedBeast! )
|)””’) Built with home-grown CodeProject components!
-”-”-
|
|
|
|
|
Not only the syntax. With Java/C# you also have...
0. Garbage collection, a.k.a. the programmer doesn't want to bother taking care of his pointers and he wouldn't mind sacrificing runtime efficiency for coding easiness.
1. Complex class libraries that you have to learn before you can write a decent, non-trivial application
2. OOP is mandatory, which isn't bad in itself, but...
a) Everything.IsDerivedFromABaseObjectClass() == true // yuck!
b) No multiple inheritance... WHY??? Ok, 99% of the programmers out there don't want to bother undestanding virtual inheritance. So there you have interfaces, which, IMHO, are just as (or even more) messy.
I'd love to continue with this rant, but I have to go to sleep. Sorry!
To those who understand, I extend my hand.
To the doubtful I demand: Take me as I am.
Not under your command, I know where I stand.
I won't change to fit yout plan. Take me as I am.
|
|
|
|
|
I completely agree with you. I think Microsoft was so much inspired by the Java while developing C#, there are some differences but on the core they are both same…
cout << "\0";
// its backSlashZero
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
