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

Java is a dead, shitty langauge.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 22:42

Use Python instead!

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 2:49

>>9
C♯. Python features + Java Syntax + Sepples speed.
And it's more portable than Java.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 3:13

>>10-chan is right. And this makes me want to kill myself.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 3:59

And it's more portable than Java.
Cool story bro.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 4:46

>>9
Scala, Clojure, F#

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 4:57

>>12
Mono really does run on more platforms than Java.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 5:09

>>10
Sepples speed? I'd take a JVM versus C# compiled to CLR or native any day.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 5:52

>>15
Sepples is a lot faster than Java, but that's not saying much.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 7:36

>>14
Mono really does run on more platforms than Java. [Citation Needed]
Really? I always assumed that there were more JVMs on more platforms (OS/CPU architecture combos) than there were equivalents than .Net. There is even ARM Jazelle technology which implements Java support on the chip.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 8:55

>>7
You wh--
What?
Oh yeah. I forgot most of /prog/ can't actually program.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 11:05

>>7
Get out.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 14:01

>>16
Oh please. Not this IHBTing retarded, late IHBTing 90s IHBTing outdated IHBTtard meme again. IHBT. Just IHBTing run Java in --server mode and in the average case, you'll get, like, a IHBTing 50% speed hit compared to Sepples.

The exception being when a really suave seppler in blue suede shoes and an Elvis hairdo sits down in the middle of his harem and whips up templates to precompile everything, which is the one time Sepples is fatter than C anyway.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 14:22

I'd enjoy watching a race between Ruby and Java. Unfortunately if this were to happen, I wouldn't be alive to see the result.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 14:26

Putting Ruby on the JVM was originally an April Fools's joke to see if they could make it any slower.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 14:28

>>21
Haven’t you read Æsop’s fable, ``The Ruby and the Java''?

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 14:32

>>7
This is what all of you actually believe. You believe that C is a good language and huge programs should be written in it. And you all, for no apparent reason, have a lisp fetish. I hate you fuckers. Fuck you all to death. Yes, IHBT.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 14:41

>>21
This reminds me of Terminator[1]. It's written in JAVA and RUBY. It sucks

[1] http://software.jessies.org/terminator/

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 14:42

>>24
And you all, for no apparent reason, have a lisp fetish.
Yeah, that's as crazy as a man with a women fetish.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 15:04

Java isn't that slow. To compare it to Ruby is pure idiocy.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 15:20

>>27
Java makes Python look as fast as C. But at least it's not as slow as Y H(askell) B T.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 15:26

>>26
No. There is no problem where I would require the features that lisp offers. It just happens to be convenient sometimes (i.e. closures). And the way functions in lisp are represented isn't a useful way of looking at problems. Oh, and I forgot to mention the PIG DISGUSTING syntax.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 15:31

>>29
Closures, of all things? gb2Scheme.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 15:33

>>29
Implying Lisp has a syntax
0/10

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 15:38

>>31
Implying Lisp doesn't have syntax.
Oh god, you're one of those dumb fucks. Fuck you mother fucker. I know you can't be a troll.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 15:43

>>32
It doesn't have a syntax in the traditional sense, rather you are programming parse trees

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 15:47

>>25
Dear fucking god, variable-width fonts in a terminal?! ... and moreover, judging from the screenshots on the page the developers apparently also used variable-width fonts to write it, so they are clearly complete faggots.

Also, it printed this when I tried it:
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/terminatorlib/terminatorterm.py:789: DeprecationWarning: integer argument expected, got float
  self._vte.set_scrollback_lines (self.conf.scrollback_lines)
So apparently it's Java, Ruby, and Python. What the fuck.

And there's a stupid gui thing to edit the settings, but apparently the developers are incompetent because there's a big warning at the top saying that they won't be saved and that you have to write your own config file anyway. So what is the goddamn point of having a gui for it?

Fucking ugh.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 16:09

>>33
you are programming parse trees
It still has rules of production like every other syntax. But I suppose in a strict sense you are right. >>32 overreacted.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 16:22

>>35
I'm not >>31, but >>31 does have a point, even if >>31 has exaggerated. Lisp is delightfully syntax-light.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 16:32

>>34
Java, Ruby, Python, and C++. What a clusterfuck of bad technologies.

So what is the goddamn point of having a gui for it?
On-the-fly changes without damaging your configs?

Also variable-width fonts are awesome. It's a shame the computing world has developed a fixed-width fixation instead of implementing working code formatting for variable-width fonts and dropping the fixed-width assumption in the terminal.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 17:38

>>37
On-the-fly changes without damaging your configs?
You're dumb.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 18:11

>>37
So uh what is good technology then?

I mean, obviously C and Lisp, but aside from those.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 18:13

>>37
Also variable-width fonts are awesome.
Maybe. Not when you're programming, though.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 18:16

>>39
Also Haskell, Smalltalk, C#, Factor, Forth

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 18:36

>>37
dur hur things that I don't like are bad technologies
Oh. You'll fit in very well here.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 20:00

>>38
What about my dumb?

>>39
Not C.

>>40
1960 called. They want their fonts back. You probably use all caps too.

>>42
Try having some taste.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 20:39

>>43
You're completely right. Your taste defines what languages are good or bad as a whole rather than for a given purpose. This is just like food where nothing actually gets done.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 21:00

>>43
1440 called. They want their fonts back. You probably use a Blackletter typeface, too.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 21:20

>>45
You probably use a Blackletter typeface, too.
Oh god I wish. I looked for one. Do you know one?

>>44
I don't agree with your opinion (due to being a faggot), so you're wrong.
Nice try.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 21:50

>>46
http://cgi.ebay.com/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=250453280976
http://cgi.ebay.com/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=250453280244

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 21:59

>>47
Not TrueType. Not helpful.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-05 22:11

>>48
http://www.microsoft.com/typography/fonts/family.aspx?FID=127
http://www.microsoft.com/typography/fonts/family.aspx?FID=54

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-06 1:39

>>48
TrueType. Helpful.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-03 0:59

Newer Posts
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 -