1) GUI
2) Written in a language that isn't BBCode, lisp, haskell, lua, or C. (Assembly or an HDL may be acceptable.)
3) Discussed on codinghorror
4) It's a programming book about a specific language, including any language in (2), except possibly "The Little Lisper/Schemer" and K&R.
5) It's mentioned in a non-saged /prog/ reply.
As much as I like C, I doubt it is that functional because as far as I know (which isn't that far) that C doesn't include input as part of the language standard.
>>9
Purely functional languages are usually silly, unless they've been prepared well enough for it (like Haskell was).
Functional programming itself is just a technique, which may be supported by the language, but even if it isn't supported, as long as the language supports some form of functional abstraction (C does, of course), you can program in a functional manner. However, while you can do everything without any globals, one should know when to break the circle to make their life easier, if they're programming in mostly imperative languages.
>>15
Since it doesn't mention FIOC, it's going to exclude most of the interesting code that ever gets posted to /prog/.
Though Xarn will still win the challenges because C is still there.
>>18 What about programs with GUI frontends? Does it not suck if you use the CLI version?
Still sucks, unless the GUI is a third-party addition to an otherwise sensible program.
I think my preferred monospace font was mentioned on codinghorror once. Does this mean it sucks?
Very probably, though you should also keep in mind that a stopped clock is right twice a day.
2) Written in a language that isn't BBCode, lisp, haskell, lua, or C. (Assembly or an HDL may be acceptable.)
5) It's mentioned in a non-saged /prog/ reply. BBCode, lisp, haskell, lua, C