Rank these languages from best to worst

1. QBASIC
2. FORTRAN
3. COBOL
4. LISP
5. C
6. C++
7. Perl
8. Java
9. PHP
10. Scheme
11. Python
12. Ruby
13. Haskell
14. C#
15. Clojure
16. Scala

1. C++
2. C
3. C#
4. Python
5. Perl
6. PHP
7. Ruby
8. FORTRAN
9. QBASIC
10. Haskell
11. LISP
12. Scheme
13. COBOL
14. Clojure
15. Scala
16. Java


Thread over.

I can only rate what I know.
1. scheme
2. lisp
3. C
4. Python
4. Java
4. C++

1.  Factor
2.  Haskell
3.  C#
4.  C
5.  Forth
6.  ECMAScript
7.  Perl
8.  Objective-C
9.  Python
10. QBASIC
11. FORTRAN
12. Java
13. C++
14. Ruby
15. COBOL
16. PHP
17. LISP
18. Clojure
18. Scheme
20. Scala

1.java
2.java
3.java
4.java
5.java
6.java
7.java
8.java
9.java
10.java

Languages I know:
1. Haskell
2. C#
3. Java
4. ECMAScript
5. C
6. Sepples
7. PHP

1. Scheme
2. Haskell
<sub>16. QBASIC
16. FORTRAN
16. COBOL
16. LISP
16. C
16. C++
16. Perl
16. Java
16. PHP
16. Python
16. Ruby
16. C#
16. Clojure</sub>

>>7
/prog/ canon!!

 1. Perl
 2. C♯
 3. C++
 4. C
 5. Java
 6. Python
 7. Haskell
 8. Ruby
 9. Scheme
10. Clojure
9–10. LISP
12. Scala
13. FORTRAN
14. COBOL
15. QBASIC
 ⋮
∞. PHP

/prog/ tier
Scheme, Lisp, Haskell, Clojure, Scala

Gets the job done tier
Python, Ruby, C#

Iff you pay me tier
C C++ Java Perl

Oh God! No! tier
QBASIC FORTRAN COBOL PHP

1. C
2. Haskell
3. C#
4. Clojure
5. Scheme
6. LISP
7. Python
8. C++
9. Scala
10. Java
11. Ruby
12. Perl
13. PHP
14. FORTRAN
15. QBASIC
16. COBOL

>>11

The first 10 are fairly accurate for me if you remove Clojure, Cobol and Qbasic as I haven't yet tried them.

What is your favourite meme? Mine is the one where you grab the dick. It's so flexible! Like this *grabs SICP*. I really like the dicg grabbing meme. *grabs dick*.

1.^B_bcode
2.Scheme
3.C
4.FIOC
5. *
:
:
∞-1.Java
∞.Sepples

>>14
So Java and Sepples are equally bad?

1. C
2. VB
3. Python
4. C++
5. [bold]^BBCODE[/bold]

1. Haskell
2. LISP
3. Scheme
4. Forth

1. Fjolner
"GRUNNUR"

1. C
2. C#
3. C++
4. Clojure
5. COBOL
6. FORTRAN
7. Haskell
8. Java
9. LISP
10. Perl
11. PHP
12. Python
13. QBASIC
14. Ruby
15. Scala
16. Scheme

>>19
Alphabet Quality

It's stupid to bundle real-world languages, ENTERPRISE solutions, toy languages, undead mutants, platonic ideals, and fictional languages together.

Ruby
Python
Haskell
Perl
C
Scheme
LISP
Clojure
Scala
C++
QBASIC
FORTRAN
COBOL
C#
PHP
Java

1. Haskell
2. Scheme
3. Python
4. Ruby
5. C
6. LISP
7. C#
8. FORTRAN
9. COBOL
10. Clojure
11. Perl
12. Java
13. QBASIC
14. Scala
15. C++
16. PHP

Fact: most people who complain about COBOL have never actually used it. It's a terrible language, but it's head-and-shoulders above Perl and Java.

I can only rate what I know.
1. FORTRAN

1.HTML

/thread

1. British English

COBOL OWNS, I AM 21 years old.

1. C
2. C#
3. C++
4. COBOL
5. Clojure
6. FORTRAN
7. Haskell
8. Java
9. LISP
10. PHP
11. Perl
12. Python
13. QBASIC
14. Ruby
15. Scala
16. Scheme

main = interact (unlines . zipWith ((++) . show) [1..] . map (". "++) . sort . map (dropWhile (not . isAlpha)) . lines)

amirite?

1. C
2. C
3. C
4. C
5. All others.

>>28
Gb2lkml

>>27
>>19 QUALITY

Comparing languages is like comparing a sliderule with a ammeter -- one tool isn't "better" than the other, as they have different purposes.  Likewise, programming languages are just tools with different purposes/strengths.  C is good for realtime programs, Java is good for GUI-based applications, Perl is good for quick hacks and utilities, etc.  Schema is good for something...right?  Another consideration is platform or architecture.

Short version: any program is easy with the right language, and no one language is suited for any program.

>>31
actually it's more like comparing a hammer with a rock.

>>31
Fuck you slide rules suck.

>>31
Java is good for GUI-based applications
IHBT?

That's possibly Java's worst application, unless you enjoy having cross-platform GUIs that look like ass in all platforms.

unless you enjoy having cross-platform GUIs that look like ass in all platforms.
That's so hot. *fap fap fap fap fap*

>>34
All cross-platform GUIs look like ass, and Java has no better use.

…………………...„„-~^^~„-„„_
………………„-^*'' : : „'' : : : : *-„
…………..„-* : : :„„--/ : : : : : : : '\
…………./ : : „-* . .| : : : : : : : : '|
……….../ : „-* . . . | : : : : : : : : |
………...\„-* . .;. . .| : : : : : : : :'|
……….../ . . .;.". / '| : : : : : : : :|
……..../ .\. . . . ./. .'\ : : : : : : : |
……../ . . \ . . . . . . .\ : : : : : : :|
……./ . | . . . /. . . . . '\ : : : : : /
….../ . . . . . / . . . . . . . *-„„„„-*'
….'/ . . . . . . . . . . . .\. . . . '|
…/ . . .|. . . . ./ . . . . .\. . . .|
../ . . . | . . . .'/ . . ... . .\.. . '|
./ ' . . ./. . . . / . . . . . . . . . '|
'/ ---- __________. . __ . .. '|
'| . . . . . \ . . . . . .---- . . . . .|
'| . . . . . . \„_^- „ . . . . . . . . '|
'| . . . . . . . . .'\ .\ ./ '/ . . . . . |
| .\ . . . . . . . . . \ .'' / . . . . . .'|
| . . . . . . . . . . / .'/ . . . . . . . |
| . . . . . . .| . . / ./ .. . . . . . . .|
| . . . . . . .. . ./. /.... . . . . . . . |
| . . . . . . .. . / ./ .... . . . . . . . |
| . . . . . . ... . \.\ .. . . . . . . . . |
| . . . . . . ... . . . .. .. . . . . . . . |
| . . . . . . ... . . . .. .. . . . . . .. . |
| . . . . . . ... . . . .. .. . . . . . . .. |
| . . . . . . ... . . . .. .. . . . . . . ... |
| . . . . . . ... . . . .. .. . . . . . . .... |

[pre]…………………...„„-~^^~„-„„_
………………„-^*'' : : „'' : : : : *-„
…………..„-* : : :„„--/ : : : : : : : '\
…………./ : : „-* . .| : : : : : : : : '|
……….../ : „-* . . . | : : : : : : : : |
………...\„-* . .;. . .| : : : : : : : :'|
……….../ . . .;.". / '| : : : : : : : :|
……..../ .\. . . . ./. .'\ : : : : : : : |
……../ . . \ . . . . . . .\ : : : : : : :|
……./ . | . . . /. . . . . '\ : : : : : /
….../ . . . . . / . . . . . . . *-„„„„-*'
….'/ . . . . . . . . . . . .\. . . . '|
…/ . . .|. . . . ./ . . . . .\. . . .|
../ . . . | . . . .'/ . . ... . .\.. . '|
./ ' . . ./. . . . / . . . . . . . . . '|
'/ ---- __________. . __ . .. '|
'| . . . . . \ . . . . . .---- . . . . .|
'| . . . . . . \„_^- „ . . . . . . . . '|
'| . . . . . . . . .'\ .\ ./ '/ . . . . . |
| .\ . . . . . . . . . \ .'' / . . . . . .'|
| . . . . . . . . . . / .'/ . . . . . . . |
| . . . . . . .| . . / ./ .. . . . . . . .|
| . . . . . . .. . ./. /.... . . . . . . . |
| . . . . . . .. . / ./ .... . . . . . . . |
| . . . . . . ... . \.\ .. . . . . . . . . |
| . . . . . . ... . . . .. .. . . . . . . . |
| . . . . . . ... . . . .. .. . . . . . .. . |
| . . . . . . ... . . . .. .. . . . . . . .. |
| . . . . . . ... . . . .. .. . . . . . . ... |
| . . . . . . ... . . . .. .. . . . . . . .... |[/pre]

>>36
KDE manages to not look like ass on everything except OS X.

But if you're using OS X you're used to things looking like ass.

>>34
Are you kidding?  With what other language can you throw together a completely functional GUI that will "just work" cross-platform (no gtk/fltk/whatev libraries to install) in such a short amount of time?  We're not talking about GUIs that make you cum in your pants, just ones that work well.
My first project post-university was redoing the entire GUI of some radar interface for the military.  It had to work with RHEL5 and WinXP.  Their backend was Ada and they used these awful teleuse windows.  I used swing for all but one or the 71 frames/dialogs, and a plain old AWT frame for generated charts.  It took about 6 weeks, which is less than 3/day, but remember that I had meetings and other crap to take care of.  In any case, I can't think of any other language that could have handled that project better.  Can you?