I'd love to program. I really would. But my mind isn't cut out for it. I've seen people who think mathematically, and I'm not one of them. I keep getting stuck on Trig due the to stress from each lesson that adds on top of the previous lesson. Inane equations within equations, combined with my short memory span and occasional absent-minded backwards thinking means I have to try three times harder than someone who has math "come naturally" to them. Instead, I have a more creative mind, endlessly thinking and imagining. I believe this the opposite end of some spectrum, as these math wizards I've met seem to be less creative and more mechanical in thinking.
I was thinking of Game Designer as a possible option, as I can appreciate programming and understand it overall, but can't do the code for shit. But with creativity I could create a design that programmers can work with. The only problem is I'll be trying to work in a computer field without a CS degree, and would get little respect for not knowing the details of what a programmer is talking about.
>>81
Because I terminate my sentences with a full stop?
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-14 13:11
>>82
``Structure and interpretation of computer programs'' is not a sentence.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-14 16:17
I'd love to program. I really would. But my mind isn't cut out for it.
Protip: EVERYONE is currently programming ABSOLUTELY WRONG
You can go ahead and make it however you want it to be, chances are, if you don't like programming the way it's done now, anything you invent would be far far better.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-14 19:51
Maths == logic. Programming == logic. That is why programming is such a skill. It takes an ＥＸＰＥＲＴ ＰＲＯＧＲＡＭＭＥＲ to be able to manipulate logic to solve problems.
Name:
Anonymous2009-03-06 9:06
program gives the expected output is not impossible just nonsensical You insist on that approach lol.
>>7 Or even the (for a long time) one-man effort X-Plane (x-plane.com), possibly the most accurate flight-sim available anywhere, to the point of serious aircraft designers using it as their production simulator.
"Corporate Games Programming Still Sucks".. I've an old friend who was apart of it, and he's livid to the point of his telling every kid they're delusional if they want to work for any 'brand' computer game company. He'd worked on 'so many awesome games' at OziSoft and elsewhere that got smashed in the skull with a ballpeen hammer by a retarded greasy/pointy-haired self-important MBAs in their 11th hour...
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-20 7:20
hack my butt
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-20 7:52
>>84
How should we be programming, oh hallowed master?
There has to be some sort of combination of old /prog/ (actual intelligent discussion of programming) and new /prog/ (not using stupid smiley faces and LOL zOMG everywhere) available.
>>92
I propose we all start tripfagging and acting like 15 year olds on various forums.
Name:
15yearold!aTripfagiw2010-01-20 12:46
>>94
fUCK yEAH tRIPCOEDS XD THAT wOULD bE aWESOME wE sHOULD tOTALLY dO tHAT!!! xd
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-20 13:31
>>95
No, that's how 11/12 year olds act. By 15 I meant the likes of Christy McJesus!DcbLlAZi7U and JoeOsborn, with all the helpfullness and :Ps.
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-20 13:36
>>37 b) Respect the programmer. It's not the job of the language designer to worry about letting the programmer do something stupid. All that will do is give the impression that your language is intended for stupid programmers and the smart ones will go away and program in something that doesn't make them jump through loops in the name of the holy Object.
Oh, but it's a good way to see the difference between a good place and a bad place to work at. (In multiple ways when for example your customers demand Java)
1) Wrapping a single value in an object.
This should never be necessary. I should never have to wrap an int in an Integer just so I can stick it in a list of Objects. Polymorphism is supposed to be a feature, not a bug.
I do this(box some value into another structure or object) in other languages, but for completly different reasons:
a) Allows me to tag data in various ways, so I could get the type easily in a tagged collection of sorts. (Telling apart integer 15 and a Index structure with the value of 15. Can be useful in both dynamically typed languages, and static ones as well. Have you looked at ML's typesystem, they have such a "boxing" pattern supported natively.)
b) It's one of the many ways of passing a value by reference, if the language doesn't have direct support for reference parameters.
2) Wrapping a function in an object.
There are so many classes in the Java API that exist only to do something to something. A prime example would be the old StringTokenizer class. Luckily they've fixed that and replaced it with String.split() but the problem is still endemic throughout the API. It's the main reason why Java code ends up a morass of instantiations for doing a simple task.
That's stupid, agreed. It's probably a Java problem. Shouldn't happen if the language has closures/first-order functions
>>112
I don't understand. All I see in this thread is people talking about all the things I hate about programming, and I want to correct them on a few points but they all probably stopped browsing this site years ago.
Name:
Anonymous2013-02-13 1:17
>>112
JavaScript and Go overtook Scheme and Haskell as the languages of choice.
Also, I'm just wondering: have you guys ever craved cock so badly that you found yourself running around outside, howling at the moon for it? Literally ROARING at the top of your lungs, wanting nothing less than a dick's head churning against your glottal stop?