I'M LINUS TORVALDS
SON OF A BITCH C++
OBJECT-ORIENTED IS PIG
DO YOU WANT STL?
DO YOU WANT BOOST?
C++ IS PIG DISGUSTING
C++ PROGRAMMER IS A MURDERER
FUCKING MONOTONE
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-06 15:15 ID:Z/5brYu3
lol, linux turdballs talks like an internet tough guy
Of course C++ sucks, I can't believe many fags think it's great.
git could have been implemented in Common Lisp too. But definitely not C++.
>>2
In case of doubt, refer to the fact the Sussman and the Abelson were never too excited at OO because they understood what it was about, unlike the faggots who fap to their OO bullshit without even having a clue, OO or whatnot.
100 YEARS AGO I WROTE SOME SHITTY CODE THAT WITH THE HELP OF HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE EVENTUALLY EVOLVED INTO SOMETHING THAT IS NOW WIDELY USED. AS A CONSEQUENCE, I NEVER HAVE TO PROVIDE ACTUAL ARGUMENTS IN A DISCUSSION, EVER. I CAN JUST SAY FUCK AND BULLSHIT ON THE INTERNET AND PEOPLE LIKE >>2 WHO LACK A REAL UNDERSTANDING OF THE SUBJECT AT HAND WILL SWALLOW ALL OF IT BECAUSE I AM LINUX MOTHERFUCKING TORFAIL AND I AM ALWAYS RIGHT.
Hello, my name is Linux Tarballs and I say C++ is bullshit.
And the best of all is that I am right.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-06 23:45 ID:5qmeB5Hb
>>8 git could have been implemented in Common Lisp
just die
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-07 4:22 ID:s3BeViRg
Why not writing GIT on Python? That'd have made the most sense, being a very productive, high-level, versatile language where you can do a bit of FP, a bit of OO, and a bit of good old traditional programming as you need it. It's also easy to learn and it has an awesome library and community.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-07 4:36 ID:JOdPEfOG
>>13
That would have made too much sense for a dumb fucktard like Torvalds. Seriously, after reading his messages, I am now scared of using anything he has any say over.. I may have to switch from Linux to BSD.. hell, even Vista may be better!
>>14 ``a dumb fucktard like Torvalds''
and who may you be?
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-07 7:05 ID:s3BeViRg
>>15
Python is as scalable or non-scalable as C, with the difference that being higher level, it's easier to use the network, serialize objects, hot update functions and modules, and create more ambitious abstractions, and there's a good library that will help one way or another.
>>29 All Linus knows is C.
Let me remind you the only thing you need to know to code ANY kind of application is C It reminds me of Steve Gibson
"ChromaZone is pretty much the last word in "display hardware palette animation", so it will require you to temporarily drop your system down into 256-color mode ... but if you will give it a whirl I know you'll be quite amazed. I am not trying to sell you a copy of ChromaZone. Really, I'm not. It's just a piece of work that I'm so very proud of, that I'd really like to share the demo with you if you'll take a moment to check it out. It runs on any Windows platform (Win3/95/98), except NT, since it depends upon the virtual timer vxd (VTD) that's not present in NT."
Not portable? Incompability? aah.. assembly.
enjoy your 13.824 bytes Gibson while i can write the same thing in C and have it in maybe 20k bytes and faster that runs on any platform available.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-07 12:26 ID:7pclO8Di
>>30 Let me remind you the only thing you need to know to code ANY kind of application is C
Let me remind you the only thing you need to empty an oil tanker is a tea spoon.
>>31
YEAH LET ME REMIND YOU THAT YOU'RE LUCKY IF YOU FIND A TOPIC THAT HASN'T BEEN IMPLEMENTED IN C
anyway, we where talking about `knowledge' and not `time'
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-07 12:34 ID:DyJGZe8U
so wait, the consensus of /prog/ is that Linux sucks and that C++ sucks, but C is awesome but not really useful to use?
The consensus of /prog/ is that [Python|Haskell|Lisp|C|C++|Java|Brainfuck] [sucks|rocks|is good enough|rots your brain|is great lulz]. BBCode is the best solution for most of our daily tasks, though.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-07 13:28 ID:7Rws5u7W
>>13 >>18
Oh wow lol. Guido's little toy language. "Traditional programming." "Hot updates of functions."
Perhaps once you people grow the fuck up, you'll realize that REDEFINING FUNCTIONS ON THE FLY is NOT A GOOD WAY TO MAKE YOUR SHIT READABLE. Also, hot-updating a function for "speed" in Python, the language with the shittiest runtime since shitty runtimes were invented? Wow.
Also, get a load of this Walter Bright guy. "The easiest way to show the error is consider the code being ported to a
typical 64 bit C compiler. int's are still 32 bits, yet the array can be larger than 32 bits." Yes yes, and I would certainly iterate over an array's indices with a simple for loop even if said array would become larger than can be indexed with 32-bit signed integers. NOT! Fucking hell. 31 bits' worth of indexes in an array of the smallest C datatype, "char", would be two fucking gigabytes of continuous memory! Whomever has reason to iterate over that much data either needs himself a computation cluster, a brain, or a life.
>>38
C and Haskell. The first is the traditional tool from a more civilized era (lulz) and the second provides the completely wonderful experience of programming without having to think about execution order or when one can replace a value in a variable. That last bit is important, because mutable variables are just as much manual memory management as malloc and free.
Also, Haskell got me into formal specification. Take a look at the Z notation for shits and giggles and getting your mind pried open like a pretzel.
Ok, I'll admit to using a spot of Perl in text-processing and database access things. And shellscript for automating rsync and backup tasks. I've never had a hankering to do anything in Python however.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-07 13:55 ID:7pclO8Di
>>39 Take a look at the Z notation for shits and giggles and getting your mind pried open like a pretzel.
URL or name of a good introductory text or GTFO.
It's a good idea to practice first on some module or component you've already written. Designing stuff from the ground up is kinda tough for someone who's used to putting down some struct definitions and prototypes first.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-07 14:06 ID:7Rws5u7W
>>40
The introductory part is in the reference manual's first chapters.
>>30 Let me remind you the only thing you need to know to code ANY kind of application is C
Let me remind you the only thing you need to know to code ANY kind of application is rules for a Turing machine.
enjoy your 13.824 bytes Gibson while i can write the same thing in C and have it in maybe 20k bytes and faster that runs on any platform available.
As long as you use the mostly useless, often unsafe standard library alone, and of course if linked to glibc 2.2 because there's a bug in 2.3 for some NetBSDs and then if your terminal is set to foo and your locale is bar, problems arise because baz feature is left unspecified etc. etc. etc.
Enjoy your OMG OPTIMIZED piece of shit; I write a sufficiently fast program in a decent language in a fraction of your time, which works in every conceivable platform using a rich standard library which includes even a fucking web server.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-07 16:55 ID:8KUid5zr
>>33
My consensus is that C is great for a portable assembly, right tool for the right job, C fags and Gentoo ricers are stupid, Linux Tarballs is alright, C++ sucks and Python/Lisp/Lua/Haskell/Ruby/Erlang/whatever floats your boat is good.
>>44 wears heavy gloves around dangerous things, like bread knives and such.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-07 17:00 ID:+0SN3fiI
>>44 As long as you use the mostly useless, often unsafe standard library alone
mostly useless often unsafe?
.. What kind of `features' or `functions' do you expect from it?
I'm curious, really.
Also glibc 2.3 being buggy is an implementation detail; it has nothing to do with actual C.
sorry, but you fail.
locales are a pain in the ass, but not a real problem in C; there are others which you have not described, still C prevails.
Let me remind you the only thing you need to know to code ANY kind of application is rules for a Turing machine.
Touring* you faggot.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-07 17:01 ID:8KUid5zr
>>37 Perhaps once you people grow the fuck up, you'll realize that REDEFINING FUNCTIONS ON THE FLY is NOT A GOOD WAY TO MAKE YOUR SHIT READABLE.
Lol, a poor scared C programmer who can't take more than his static explicitly typed hello world functions.
He's also too stupid to realize there's more than speed to it. In fact, hot updating for speed? What the fuck are you talking about? Can you really be that clueless? Hot updating means that my program can launch a maintenance thread that allows me to reload libraries or rewrite functions as the program runs, to fix something. I don't even have to restart my program for changes to take effect. Running instances of functions are not affected by the new code, and the old code is garbage collected when no longer in use. Can you do that in C, Cfag?
Shitty runtime? CPython may not be the most efficient (Guido's GIL), but the runtime as a whole is far more stable, compatible and better quality than any Clib. Lol 40 versions of libc and msvcrt. Lol sprintf, scanf, strtok, strcat, stranything.
Lol sprintf, scanf, strtok, strcat, stranything. fixed ``Lol i never understood C :(''
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-07 17:10 ID:8KUid5zr
>>37 Perhaps once you people grow the fuck up, you'll realize that REDEFINING FUNCTIONS ON THE FLY is NOT A GOOD WAY TO MAKE YOUR SHIT READABLE.
Lol, a poor scared C programmer who can't take more than his static explicitly typed hello world functions.
He's also too stupid to realize there's more than speed to it. In fact, hot updating for speed? What the fuck are you talking about? Can you really be that clueless? Hot updating means that my program can launch a maintenance thread that allows me to reload libraries or rewrite functions as the program runs, to fix something. I don't even have to restart my program for changes to take effect. Running instances of functions are not affected by the new code, and the old code is garbage collected when no longer in use. Can you do that in C, Cfag?
Shitty runtime? CPython may not be the most efficient (Guido's GIL), but the runtime as a whole is far more stable, compatible and better quality than any Clib. Lol 40 versions of libc and msvcrt. Lol sprintf, scanf, strtok, strcat, stranything.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-07 17:11 ID:8KUid5zr
>>50
Oops sorry, reposted >>48 instead of my next post.
>>49
I do understand it, and I understand how many of these functions are useless for production use. And they were already lame tools to begin with.
What kind of `features' or `functions' do you expect from it?
We already discussed this a few months ago. Start with basic higher-order and FP utility functions, real strings, proper Unicode and Unicode semantics, decent random numbers, arbitrary precision Maths, dynamic, heterogeneous lists, hash tables and sets, decent date functions, Perl-compatible regular expressions, HTML and URI-oriented string manipulation and escaping functions, XML parsers (of at least the two popular types plus some kind of simple as fuck object mapper), maybe INI and CSV file parsers too, or what's even better, built-in, standard lexer + LALR(1) parser, a JSON and a binary serializer, a standard database interface, standard built-in BSD sockets (maybe with a good template for a TCP server implemented as higher-order functions), and of course, a standard interface to systems calls to manipulate files and directories in any conceivable way, create process, basic user and permission handling, abstract terminal access, a simple direct graphics and audio layer (like SDL), and some GUI toolkits. Maybe even OpenGL bindings.
>>51
why is sprintf() lame? Start with basic higher-order and FP utility functions,
fuck your functional programming you fucking idiot real strings
okay, what in the fucking world is that decent random numbers
in a standard library? be glad there is rand() for you faggot! hash tables and sets
*facepalm* decent date functions
WHAT THE FUCK maybe INI and CSV file parsers too
in a standard library? my god you are fucking stupid standard built-in BSD sockets
why don't you read a bit why there are no standard socket functions? maybe with a good template for a TCP server implemented as higher-order functions
LOL
now i'm *very* sure you don't know C
what the fuck "real strings"
what the FUCK
>>51 We already discussed this a few months ago. I'm a Python fanboy and want every language to be exactly like Python.
Also note that the guy you're originally replying to knows Haskell.
>>52
WHERES YOUR FUQIN REPLY TO MY POST NWO YOU PATHETTIC PIECE OF SHIT!?
YEAH, THOUGH SO
SOME FUCKING LAMER THAT CANNOT READ THE C STANDARD BECAUSE HE'S TOOM UCH FO A FAGGOT AND HE CANNOT GRASP THE CONCEPT AND THE REASON C EXSITS
WHAT A FUCKING FAGGOT
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-07 19:25 ID:8KUid5zr
>>53 why is sprintf() lame?
Can't allocate sufficient memory automatically.
okay, what in the fucking world is that
Shit that is:
- Binary-safe
- Dynamically expanded with O(1) complexity
- O(1) length
- Unicode-supporting, with transparent encoding or not
in a standard library? be glad there is rand() for you faggot!
Yes faggot, in a standard library!
in a standard library? my god you are fucking stupid
It's basic functionality motherfucker! Unlike your hello worlds program, I want to get things done, and to do it, I don't want to reinvent the wheel or collect 47 stupid buggy incomplete and incompatible libraries! It should be in the standard library because it's what everyone uses for real work!
now i'm *very* sure you don't know C
Actually, I've done quite a bit of work with it, both outside uni and a couple of things at work. You are free to not believe me, but I know what I'm talking about. No, I don't have trouble understanding C "strings", and yes, I can deal with **(unsigned int *)&lol->hax. I also knew (now forgot most of it, but can remember with a book) 80387 assembly (learnt it myself, during my OMG OPTIMIZED teenage phase) and R2000 assembly (uni, for our OMG OPTIMIZED class; I was among the 10% who had a clue about what was going on).
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-07 19:27 ID:8KUid5zr
>>54 We already discussed this a few months ago. I'm a Python fanboy and want every language to be exactly like Python.
Lol, I see what you did there.
>>48
>far more stable, compatible and better quality than any Clib.
Oh wow, lol. Talk about badmouthing something you have no idea about.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-07 19:53 ID:chwwYiCp
learnt it myself, during my OMG OPTIMIZED teenage phase
Ha! I went through one of those too. Glad I did now though, the assembler knowledge has actually been incredibly useful.
09:13:23 up 285 days, 1:52, 1 user, load average: 0.21, 0.20, 0.18 9:13:23 up 285 days, 1:52, 1 user 1:52
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-08 17:50 ID:ixMuw3Wk
80387 assembly
Is this a new meme, or are you saying you went out and specifically learned assembly for floating-point (and nothing else)?
80386 = normal proc, but no floating point
80387 = coprocessor that implemented IEEE 754
Agree on the rest though.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-08 18:27 ID:omVwzbA1
The only reason anyone would hate a language is because they are bad at using said language.
The only problem with C++ is that it's easy to become over-reliant on the STL. But, you know, that's kind of the point with OOP.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-08 18:58 ID:md8ievUP
>>66
Or because said language is shitty. Don't forget that part.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-08 19:01 ID:XMoZ8/Ue
>>66 The only problem with C++
Problems? Okay, let's count:
1. Lack of powerful features
2. No garbage collector for OOP sucks
3. Statically, explicitly typed
4. Template insanity
5. Too many features, despite not being too powerful, make people use C++--, and my C++-- != your C++--
...