Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-4041-8081-

Why should I code?

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 4:36

Tell me 10 reasons I should learn to code in C

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 5:13

Learn to code in C, because:
1. It gives you a good acknowledgment of the structure of the memory
2. It forces you to reason without abstractions, so you learn how to find your way;
3. It's very popular in kernels and embedded systems;
4. It's the first step to learn C++ (please, don't try to learn C++ until you are a C guru... unless you desire a painfull death);
5. Despite things that you'll hear, there's a huge amount of libraries out there!
6. You can easily build bindings for every high-level language (as python);
7. OVER 9000;
8. It has a beautiful syntax, plagiarized by java (LOL);
9. It's the base language of all the UNIX systems including GNU/Linux
10. Every time you don't program in C a cat explodes.

Have a nice day

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 5:14

wow, this thread doesn't have any replies yet?

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 5:16

>>4

Oh really? Try to write an operating system in javascript. Come on.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 5:38

>>9
1. You may use java without knowing what a pointer is. Good stuff. I won't cry on your complains on programming-is-difficult.;
2. A programmer who knows how low level works is a good programmer. A programmer who doesn't know it will be (not so) good only for java;
3. Hey, did you know that windows has a kernel too? Big surprise... and probably is written in assembly, C and C++;
4. I don't get your joke... and your rebuttal too.
5. Here I mean that a lot of people says that there's no library for the C programming language. C doesn't have battery included, but, I swear, there's a huge amount of library out there. And there's a huge amount of asses like you, >>9.
6. No. I may write a good performance code in C and serve it as binding for some high level faggot;
7. OVER 9000
8. So, why the same syntax is used by a lot of programming language?
9. Even if it allows you to communicate efficiently with your kernel? Do you really think that your high level programming language doesn't lean on C?
10. Every time you program in C a cat revives.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 5:38

>>8
http://www.masswerk.at/jsuix/

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 5:41

>>10
You don't need to write an operating system, but you need to USE an operating system, right? I deduce that somebody wrote it for you, and that guy(s) wrote it with C. You'd better to stop using your computer...

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 5:47

Actually if you are using an embedded board, with real time requirements and a really small amount of memory, automatic memory management may be dangerous for your deadlines.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 5:52

>>17
Oh, really? It's clear that you have a poor experience in C programming. But don't worry about this: we'll forgive you.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 5:56

>>17
>>21

Go there http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernel_portability_and_supported_architectures and ask yourself how this can be done in pure assembly. Then get back here and suck mah dick faggot

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 6:21

EXPERT /PROG TROLLER

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 6:28

>>33
where do you think the myth of cats having 9 lives came from?

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 8:00

Hey people! This guy needs to be trolled again. Could someone proceed with trolling?

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 11:57

The same fucktard managed to post 7 times in a row. WTF?

Name: FrozenSperm !FrOzENLOAU 2009-01-08 12:03

>>37
As long as you pause for a few seconds between making posts, this board doesn't otherwise restrict you from posting consecutive times in the same thread. I think this is a bad idea because it increases the potential for spam to be posted.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forum_spam

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 12:24

>>39
SPAM

DRINK COCA COLA FOR THAT REFRESHING BROWNNESS

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 12:32

>>39
You are worthless. Your posts are worthless. Your posts are spam. Go enjoy your Asperger's somewhere else.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 12:33

>>41
What's wrong with enjoying our Asperger's here?  That's what we all've been doing the last few years (since the day /prog/ stopped being helpful).

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 12:35

>>42
Nothing. If you're not a faggot.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 12:35

>>41
Enjoy I am Asperger's somewhere else?

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 12:36

>>44
What?

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 12:37

>>45
I don't find your posts relevant to my boards.
You haven't proved that your posts aren't spam, you just make up excuses so you can continue your idiocy.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 12:39

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAAAA!!!
you think your tough huh?
two words Sussman and Abelson.
i have written two programming books at the same time in less than 5 seconds i have been training for 3 years.
also SICP,On Lisp,and TAoCP.
you might be stronger than me,but i know im smarterer and quicker with shift-0.
i only weigh 130 pounds pure lean parentheses.
one argument you'll be on your way to reread SICP.
your the one whose a homo.i can get Julie Sussman anytime i want you probably haven't ever been laid before.
you probably have sex with your REPL.
you don't even know me,and you don't want to.
you'll be lucky if your even worth the apply one lambda and you'll recurse forever.
though i'd be hapy to humiliate you in front of all your friends.
btw IM the best.
i have trolled in Slashdot, Reddit, Digg,paulgraham.com, Craigslist,MIT,world4chan.org.
never lost an internet fight!
im undefeated in competitive forced indentation/parenthesis counting.
im on my way to Nirvana.
go ahead and come step anytime you want.b*tch

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 12:39

>>46
I think he was talking about the your/you're distinction.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 12:41

>>49
I know. It wasn't invalid.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 12:42

>>50
I don't care. If I want to read Wikipedia, I can look it up myself. We don't need you to copy/paste this crap in every thread.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 12:45

>>54
But... but...
Go away.

Name: sage 2009-01-08 12:48

sage

Name: "GRUNNUR" 2009-01-08 12:51

>>56
"GRUNNUR"

Name: FrozenVoid!FrOzEn2BUo 2009-01-08 14:31

Code toad frumple frump sqoed.
Woo bickle ngaardipple titsquit bumshit.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-08 18:55

YHBT

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-12 21:49

You know what would be great? If half of the fucking posts weren't deleted from this discussion. Maybe I'd be able to read the goddamn thread.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-12 21:50

>>60
☣ Please try to ignore troll posts! ☣

http://dis.4chan.org/read/prog/1231209853/10

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 1:03

>>60
I remember reading the posts when they were made. Trust me, you are much better off without reading them.

Name: =+=*=F=R=O=Z=E=N==V=O=I=D=*=+= !FrOzEn2BUo 2009-01-13 1:11

>>62
Your express something i call "voluntary ignorance".

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 4:07

I recommend c to anyone who fancies themselves as a REAL PROGRAMMER.

It's the only "high-level" language where you don't feel nanied - C trusts you. You can do what you want with memory etc. If you're too retarded to get it right, then C isn't for you. But if you are good enough, it's great to feel free to do what you want.

Name: =+=*=F=R=O=Z=E=N==V=O=I=D=*=+= !FrOzEn2BUo 2009-01-13 4:12

>>64
I don't what so special in C which can't be used in assembly with macros.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 7:03

>>65
Task: Create a list of n elements. Insert m elements at random positions. Print them out.
a) Do it in C
b) Do it in assembler

C code can be compiled on every system to use the possiblities to its fullest extend, as opposed to assembly, which is pretty much static there unless you rewrite your whole code.
Assembly is also a lot slower to develop and a lot harder to debug.

Could you and your faggotry kindly GTFO now, now that you have proven once again, that you have no idea how computers work.

also IHBT

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 7:24

>>66
FrozenFag probably thinks that Win32+x86 Asm is the One True Platform, so portability doesn't matter that much to him.

I wouldn't say assembly is that hard to debug if you're used to debugging applications without having their source code, so when writing your own apps in asm, you would probably recognize most of the code as you've written it yourself.

That said, I really don't see a reason to use asm to do most high level tasks such as those you listed, unless speed is utmost concern, you'd only be wasting your time when you could spent it on actually developing more of your application.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 8:12

>>68
yeah, for your fucking information i have.
the computer i'm using to type this is a fucking x64 CPU!
it's also dual core, so that's x128.
please check your facts before posting

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 9:00

>>68
Various server applications, embedded systems, game consoles/arcades, specialized CPUs used as part of other integrated devices(such as cards used in your PC), and so on. Consoles/handhelds are bought by many casual customers. A CPU doesn't necesarilly mean it has to run on your home computer, however some could be used for such purposes(ex: Cell(PS3), PowerPCs,.. ).

Please stop it with your "If it's not a x86-based CPU, it's not a real CPU" and "If it's not a x86 assembly, it's not a real assembly" crap.

You have a lot to learn, and yet you spend your time trolling /prog/, please go away.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 9:02

>>68
yes, i have. i've bought several arm and 68k cpus, and one z80.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 9:21

i only use SPARC based machines

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 9:33

>>74
real men keep their computers forever and don't upgrade

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 9:34

>>68
Have you seen anyone buy A FUCKING MOBILE PHONE?

I RAGED.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 9:47

>>74
You must be quite sheltered to only know of x86 CPUs.

Maybe your local ``computer'' shop doesn't stock CPUs based on those archs as standalones(they may do it in form of peripherals, appliances, various devices, ... ), however they are available for order from specialized shops (both real and online).

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 10:06

>>74
arm:
 http://www.shopping.hp.com/handheld
 http://www.nseries.com/products/n810/
 http://www.apple.com/iphone/
 http://www.nintendo.com/ds/
 http://gp2x.org/

z80:
 http://education.ti.com/educationportal/sites/US/productDetail/us_ti84pse.html

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 10:12

>>80
No one in this thread was talking about personal computers exclusively, until you came around. Now, please excuse us while we countinue our discussion about C in general.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 10:15

☣ Please try to ignore troll posts! ☣

http://dis.4chan.org/read/prog/1231209853/10

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 10:36

>>1
If you care about learning lower level stuff about programming/computing, then it is good to learn C in conjunction with your CPU's opcodes. Some practical reasons why you would want a lower level understanding include: tuning software code to perform optimally to a given architecture; directly programming computer hardware; creating/understanding/modifying language compilers; be able to read the massive quantity of code written in C. If all you care about is writing programs, then there are other higher level languages that abstract a whole lot of programming bookkeeping.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 10:45

>>80
yes, they are. now please go back to /pr/.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 10:56

>>85
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/personal_computer
"A small computer, built around a microprocessor, for use by one person at a time."

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 11:18

>>78
>These architectures were displaced by PC because they are just tiny incompatible domains with "approved" hardware(just like Macs) while PC is an open standard.

WHAT?
Most of those CPUs have fully open specs if you plan to develop on them, you can download the documentation freely from the manufacturers website (and other support sites), just like you can do for Intel CPUs. And in a lot of cases, these CPUs are available for those wanting to design their own platforms/devices or code for a specific platform.

Some specific platforms, such as consoles/handhelds may have specific libraries which are not available except under a NDA, and you may need a debug device to actually write code for that platform, but the actual CPU specs and usage tends to be as open as it gets. Take this in another way: let's say you have private OS(ex. modified version of Windows) for which you're given no documentation which runs on your console(ex. Xbox), however the console's CPU and hardware are known(slightly modifed x86 P3). The same logic could be aplied to the DS or PS3 and other consoles/devices, as the actual CPUs which are used in those platforms are incredibly well documented( think thousands of pages of freely available documentation ).

Oh and Macs are x86 and you can run the software on a standard PC as long as the Mac has drivers for whatever peripherals you have.

Why the fuck am I even bothering answering to your posts,  you've repeatedly proven incapable of understanding such simple concepts.

RAEG IHBT

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 11:19

>>87
Personal computers 10-20 years ago were very lucky if they had that kind of resources, go back more further and that DS will look like a supercomputer.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 11:20

erm make that 20+

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 12:42

(1) C is for experts
(2) EXPERT PROGRAMMERS
(3) I AM AN EXPERT PROGRAMMER
(4) THIS IS /PROG/ YOU DO NOT DEMAND 10 REASONS WHY TO PROGRAM IN C, DONT HELP HIM!!!!!!!
(4) Read SICP.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 12:45

>>92
EXPERT COUNTER

>>88
☣ Please try to ignore troll posts! ☣

http://dis.4chan.org/read/prog/1231209853/10

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 13:10

>>93
Uploaded it to userscripts.org[1] for people who can't be bothered to copy paste that script. I wonder why so many people haven't done so yet, it greatly improves the /prog/ user experience.

__________________________
http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/40415

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 14:02

>>96
Make sure you upload this one too.
// ==UserScript==
// @name           FVCloak
// @description    Renders your posts invisble to FrozenVoid
// @namespace      http://dis.4chan.org/prog/
// @include        http://dis.4chan.org/*;
// @version        1.?
// ==/UserScript==

for each (var input in document.getElementsByTagName('textarea')) {
   if (input.name == 'com') input.value = '[spoiler]troll LISP SICP[/spoiler]\n'
}

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 16:13

>>91
The actual clock speed is only a part of the equation, the other part is the actual design of the architecture(RISC vs CISC and so on) and how many clocks each instruction takes. If you believe that those CPUs are equivalent, I dare you to try running some DS games with the same speed on your 486.
You won't be able to, even with a decent dynarec engine
Also, compare the power consumption of a 486+said RAM vs the DS's hardware.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 16:30

>>99
YHBT

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 16:41

Task: Copy 4 words in your RAM (if you thought of strings now, you are probably wrong here) to a different location using an ARM or a x86-based CPU.

x86:
- set pointer to ram adress
- move value of ram adress into your accumulator(register)
- set pointer to ram adress 2
- move value of accumulator to ram adress
- repeat 4 times.
ARM:
- set pointer to ram adress
- copy 4 values into 4 registers
- set pointer
- copy to new adress

ARM is more effiencent for those things.

Also, FaggotVoid, if you say your processor needs to run windows, to be called a proper CPU, take a look at Pocket PCs.
They can run Windows[1]. And they run ARM processors[2].

_____________

References:
1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_CE
2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pocketpc#Definition

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 16:42

>>101
YHBTE

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 16:45

>>101
You can't win an argument against a troll. You should know better.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 17:24

>>1
you shouldn't learn to code. your way to retarded.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 18:10

^

your

and

to

*facepalm*

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 18:19

>>101
Y u dont using spesal copi 4 wrdz 2 diff loczion op???

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 18:26

>>106
probably because 486 didn't have as many extensions as modern x86 CPUs

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 20:12

>>107
MOVS already existed in the 8086, you dolt.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 20:21

>>107
He could have used a string operation, though.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-13 20:50

>>108
>>109
(rep) movsd would work indeed, but depending on what he plans to do with the data, some SIMD extensions might be a better idea

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-14 7:14

>>106
It would still require more processing cycles, since you have insufficient registers to do it all at once.
You can also store more values in the internal registers of an ARM, which makes processing data there a lot faster than always getting it from your RAM/cache.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-14 8:34

C and C++ are the language's of the gods.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-14 9:16

>>112
What about the language's other stuff?

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-14 9:22

>>112
languages of shitty gods

Name: Anonymous 2009-03-06 6:22

The Functionally Dead Ddog.

Name: Trollbot9000 2009-07-01 9:07

Bookkeeping?
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List
All trademarks and copyrights on this site are owned by their respective parties. All comments and posts are the responsibility of their own posters.
- Tinychan + 2ch Mode -