>>6
Stop lying, everyone knows the internet runs on rainbows.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-14 10:13 ID:HEFntvuw
FUCK STRUCTURE
CPU'S DO NOT RUN ON STRUCTURE
THEY RUN ON FUCKING MACHINE CODE
ONE INSTRUCTION AT A TIME
NONE OF THIS HIERARCHICAL SHIT
SO STFU
GOTO OR GTFO
>>16
IT'S AN INSTRUCTOR NOT A QUESTION
GTFO
GOTO GTFO
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-15 2:00 ID:oWI5zSHU
if not structures, what about classes
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-15 11:58 ID:2KmFxZF4
>>18
HTML doesn't have classes. If you understood the divine structure of HTML, you would know there is no need for classes.
You know, when I was younger I also used to wonder why there was no support for object-oriented programming in HTML. Back then, it seemed to me like OOP was the new cool thing that should be incorporated in every real programming language.
But then one night in 2004, as I was writing my third HTML operating system, I had a great revelation. I saw the Document Object Model unfold in front of me. I saw the beautiful patterns of tags and attributes – the structure. As I witnessed perfection in its purest form, I realized how foolish and naïve I had been, having thought HTML would have any need to implement such a primitive paradigm as object-oriented programming.
You might ask "so how do I accomplish [foo] in HTML then?", and the simple truth is that if you're thinking about the problem in object-oriented terms, your approach is the wrong one to begin with.
The marvelous structure of HTML transcends time, space and reality. It is not something you can simply explain with words, you have to be able to feel the very spirit of hypertext within you. I hope one day you will be able to experience what I did.
C doesn't have classes. If you understood the divine structure of C, you would know there is no need for classes.
You know, when I was younger I also used to wonder why there was no support for object-oriented programming in C. Back then, it seemed to me like OOP was the new cool thing that should be incorporated in every real programming language.
But then one night in 2004, as I was writing my third C operating system, I had a great revelation. I saw the Function Pointers unfold in front of me. I saw the beautiful patterns of asterisks and ampersands – the structure. As I witnessed perfection in its purest form, I realized how foolish and naïve I had been, having thought C would have any need to implement such a primitive paradigm as object-oriented programming.
You might ask "so how do I accomplish [foo] in C then?", and the simple truth is that if you're thinking about the problem in object-oriented terms, your approach is the wrong one to begin with.
The marvelous structure of C transcends time, space and reality. It is not something you can simply explain with words, you have to be able to feel the very spirit of hypertext within you. I hope one day you will be able to experience what I did.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-15 13:50 ID:WI0rfULe
>>21
You can do anything in C++ that you can do in C. Operating systems are best written in C to ensure stability, however.
>>25
C++ has never been, and never will be a superset of C. Do we really have to have this useless discussion with clueless C++-tards every fucking week?
But feel free to argue with Stroustrup: "C++ is a direct descendant of C that retains almost all of C as a subset."
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-15 14:43 ID:0A3chUpy
>>28
Only if I'm taking the only possible logical stance on the issue.
But feel free to argue with Stroustrup: ``In the strict mathematical sense, C isn't a subset of C++. There are programs that are valid C but not valid C++ and even a few ways of writing code that has a different meaning in C and C++.''
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-15 14:47 ID:WI0rfULe
It is irrelevant. Both C and C++ are turing complete. Thread over.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-15 14:52 ID:dhX0rBE3
>>30 turing complete
FUCKING CHRIST IF I SEE ANOTHER FAG MISPELLING THIS I'LL FUCKING KILL SOMEONE.
TOURING COMPLETE MOTHERFUCKER, CAN YOU SPELL IT?
>>30,34
Fucking troll.
- C is not touring complete.
- C++ is an object oriented extension to C that makes it touring complete.
- HTML has always been touring complete.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-15 22:34 ID:PpJxLEYZ
>>40
Well yeah, using a reserved word as a label is going to make problems.
Yeah, but XHTML is a touring complete extension to HTML.
Name:
Anonymous2007-06-05 17:17 ID:rLRFsymA
XHTML is more of a Touring-complete subset of HTML, removing the non-Touring-complete parts.
There's also the enterprise way of writing markup. For example:
<B>...</B> is so unprofessional. To really be able to scale up to your business needs, you have to do <STRONG>...</STRONG>.
Name:
rollfle2007-06-06 0:06 ID:F39+VEdW
bes 1 is STIPHIN H()RKING LANGWIJ
Name:
Anonymous2007-06-06 6:28 ID:a+DWmzyf
>>64
Even more enterprise-quality: <STYLE>
.Strong {
font-weight: bold;
}
</STYLE>
<SPAN CLASS="Strong">...</SPAN>
Name:
Anonymous2007-06-06 7:01 ID:VrO246LT
>>66
Now split them into two files, and put .html on one server, and .css on other
Name:
Anonymous2007-06-07 3:35 ID:WyCXkMuT
IF U WERE DROPPED TO /opt TOMORROW, I WOULDNT GO 2 UR DELETION CUZ ID B N UPSTREAM BUGZILLA FLAMIN DA CUNT THAT MADE UR EBUILD!
__
.' `.
|a_a |
\<_)__/
/( )\
|\`> < /\
\_|=='|_/
WE TRUE NERDS
WE OPTIMIZE OUR CFLAGS TOGETHER
WE TALKIN ON IRC WITH www.opera.com TOGETHER
send this PENGUIN to every thread you care about including this one if you care. C how many times you get this, if you get 256 your A TRUE NERD
The desktop the dock the Start button and the file you created and shit bricks r n r n r n r I P Holly Ackerman R I P Holly Ackerman R I P Holly Ackerman R I P Holly Ackerman R I know only SCHEME and HASKELL and LISP and am lazy and stupid REDDITESQUE STUPID SHIT stupid retards do with their fucking language If it just failed to.
Name:
Anonymous2009-03-06 8:04
This is of course by the browser security lockdownz yes and xml request in various different websites on the FUQIN TOPIC AT.
Bringing /prog/ back to its people
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy