If it's C or C++, it's crap!

We don't live in the 1980s anymore. If you want to get things done, forget about languages like C and C++. C is too basic to get anything done quickly, and C++ is too complex to remember.

Python, Perl, Lisp, Haskell, Prolog, et al, are superior. Leave C and C++ to the vidya gaem programmers. They don't know shit anyway.

All right, I'll do that then. I pick /Pr_olog/.

Typical 17 year old pretending to have opinions about programming thread

>>3
Show me one thing C and/or C++ can do that the aforementioned languages cannot.

inb4 not suck

C--

>>4
Don't be ridiculous, you can invert that statement and it will mean the same because they are all Turing complete. It's about what can you express succinctly, and the answer would likely be that you can get better performance with less effort on C or C++ than with Lisp or Haskell FIOC on the other hand will forcibly run slow and serially unless calling C functions.

>>6
he thinks performance is everything
Please go back to /b/.

>>6
For example, SBCL compiled code compares quite nicely to C compiled code performance-wise. Combine that with the productivity increase and you will see that C and C++ are inferior.

which one will get me laid more (heterosexual sex)?

>>9
Lisp. Duh.

>>10
heterosexual sex
We all know that only lesbians program in Lisp.  Don't try to deny it.

>>11
( ≖‿≖)

>>7
I don't even have to tell you why you must go back to /g/, Reddit, or wherever you came from. No BBCode for you either.

>>8
Yes, no one is denying that SBCL's performance might cover most of the use cases and that you wouldn't notice much if an application was written in it (save for the size of the executables, perhaps). Same with ghc.

But the thing is that you might need that extra efficiency from C, even if it is space-efficiency, but to further my initial point, that code which competes with C implementations somewhat evenly takes much more effort to write than its counterpart. Otherwise take a look at the language shootouts (when the site comes back up...) and see whether the SBCL programs look like something that came out of SICP or the like.

>>13
See ``vidya gaems"

Too bad both CL and Scheme have fucked up designs.

>>15
Every language has fucked up designs.

>>13
The most of the shootout programs are just C programs written with a nicer syntax, the Lisp programs are at least somewhat idiomatic (last time I checked they were).
CL style is not that SICPy because of its 2-namespaceness, and probably you don't go write a Scheme metacircular evaluator for a Prolog-in-Scheme to solve some problem (because you'd just write some macros for it, of course, but SICP doesn't cover macros, since it's not a Scheme book).

>>1
Leave C and C++ to the vidya gaem programmers
Fuck you, we use ASM.

faggots
faggots
faggots