despite starting to learn c++. I'm having doubts.
I could go and look on wikipedia for hours about programming languages, but having not done much in any language. It's all shit to me. I don't understand it.
So.
If any anon is kinda enough.
I wanna get started using a language. Any. A good functional language.
but why use it, and why not use C++? I hear alot about lisp.
icba reading SICP unless it's really worth it.
Big post. Expecting tl;dr from trolls.
Cheers /prog/
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-10 19:41
>>1
You aren't expert enough to learn a programming language(especially since you considered lisp)
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-10 20:07
, --- ､_
／ミミミヾヾヽ､＿
∠ヾヾヾヾヾヾjj┴彡ﾆヽ
/ , -ー‐'"´´´ ヾ.三ヽ
,' / ヾ三ヽ Agent Smith has 4get
j | / }ミ i
| | / /ミ ! >>6-7 suggest SICP
} | r､ l ﾞiミ __」 >>10 Claims C is the only way
|]ﾑヽ､_ __∠二､__,ｨ|/ ｨ } >>15 suggests Perl
| ￣｀ﾐｌ==r'´ / |lぅ lj >>16 reacts on >>15; python is ``clean''.
「!ヽ､_____j ヽ､＿ -' ﾚ'r'/ >>19 FORCED...
`! j ヽ j_ノ >>32 Is a winfag
', ヽｧ_ '┘ ,i >>33 lols.
ヽ ___'...＿_ i ハ__ >>34 suave
ヽ ﾞ二二 ` ,' ／／ 八 >>35-1000 You will all become me.
ヽ ／'´ / ヽ
|ヽ､＿_, '´ / ／ ＼
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-10 20:25
>>1 starting to learn c++. I'm having doubts.
If you weren't having doubts about C++ I'd worry about you. Read Practical Common Lisp instead.
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-10 21:58
C is the only real programming language. Learn C++, from there you can go up to java and down to C.
I wanna get started using a language. Any. A good functional language. but why use it, and why not use C++?
Beginning to program functionally helps you to avoid some of the most common beginners mistakes like writing lightyears-long spaghetti programs with no functions. It forces you think in terms of abstraction and separating large problems into smaller parts. These are necessary skills for any programmer. Of course you can learn these in any language, but functional programming makes them obvious and natural from the beginning.
icba reading SICP unless it's really worth it.
It really, really is worth it. Read it. I suggest that you start by watching the video lectures, though.
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-11 0:08
>>5
Surely you mean "sideways to Java" and "up to C".
Name:
92007-12-11 0:09
Oh, and I forgot to add: even if you don't believe a word I said in >>9, take this free tip: whatever you do, don't start with C++. It's a horrible language and should've died before it was born.
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-11 0:10
>>11 It's a horrible language and should've died before it was born.
Hear hear.
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-11 0:24
>>11-12
C++ is pretty awesome, but only for certain applications, and only if you're already an EXPERT PROGRAMMER that can deal with writing complex programs out of assembly-level minutia.
>>11
C/C++ are fucking awesome languages if you want essentially direct translation into native assembly, which is a necessity for OS-level shit. And when you're that close to the metal on current consumer systems (x86/x64), adding fancy features like first-class functions and dynamic typing just slow shit down to the point where the system is unusable.
Maybe eventually we'll see some more interesting architectures come out which cater more nicely to non-imperative programming styles, but for the moment, we're stuck knee-deep in the shit. For high-level applications (most everything these days) though, your point is completely valid.
inb4 someone more knowledgeable than me invalidates my post.
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-11 1:01
>>16 C/C++ are fucking awesome languages
Where do you get off acting like C and C++ are the same?
if you want essentially direct translation into native assembly,
If you want this and you're not doing embedded programming, you're an idiot.
which is a necessity for OS-level shit.
No.
And when you're that close to the metal on current consumer systems (x86/x64), adding fancy features like first-class functions and dynamic typing just slow shit down to the point where the system is unusable.
Again, no. Why would that happen? Any dynamic language useful for systems programming will provide a way to deal with dynamic typing (think ``optional type declarations''). And how in the world would first-class functions cause a problem?
Maybe eventually we'll see some more interesting architectures come out which cater more nicely to non-imperative programming styles,
Special hardware is not required. Maybe in 1970 they did that, but modern compilation techniques obviate the need for this. It might be beneficial to design hardware with an eye towards GC, but there is absolutly no problem with compiling a dynamic language on a modern CPU.
>>17
I added C in there as an afterthought, because most of the stuff I had in mind applied specifically to kernel shit and embedded programming, which are typically done with C in commercial applications.
With regards to first class functions being a problem, I was referring to the fact that C function call shit maps nearly directly to x86, whereas feature sets which actually use first-class functions for other fun features involve si
>>19
I guess that's true, but the C notion of functors are very weak compared to most "toy" languages. While you could hypothetically implement fun things like lazy evaluation in C, it would be messy as fuck.
Fuck I don't even remember what my original point was; it probably wasn't even valid.
“C++ is an octopus made by nailing extra legs onto a dog.” —unknown
“I quickly found out that C++ programmers are the smartest programmers in the world, as each one I met would quickly point out to me.”
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-11 7:05
refering to >>1
which language is good for games programming?
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-11 7:21
i think you should learn c first because it's so basic, then learn the oop of c++ and you'll be set for life, most other languages will fall like dominos
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-11 7:26
>>26
Except for any non-imperative language, of course.
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-11 7:29
Learn C first, mess with pointers and data structures, it will teaches you how the machine really works.
Stay away from ENTERPRISE OOP bullshit, a string is a contiguous array of ASCII-encoded values in memory, not an "abstract object".
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-11 8:02
>>28
Fuck you with your contiguous arrays. I place my data where I want.
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-11 8:12
i store my variables in a database
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-11 9:22
i store my variables in a variablebase and my data in a database.
>>38
So you admin, then, that you are an ass? So life imitates art, I see.
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-12 6:20
I would seriously recommend Python. Work through the Dive Into Python book at http://www.diveintopython.org/, and then when you're comfortable with that, read SICP and do some of the exercises.