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

Pages: 1-4041-

Programming languages

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 15:40

Is there any language /prog/ doesn't hate?
As soon as someone says one language everyone else says its shit and a big war begins.

I have seen hate on every language.
>C
>C#
>C++
>Java
>Python
>ASM
>Lua
>Lisp
>Ruby
>Perl
>HTML
>Visual Basic
>Haskell
>etc... it goes on and on.

I personally like java, c++ and asm. But thats just going to bring a ton of people hatin on all of those.

Here is a big ass list of languages: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_programming_languages

Surely there is something that everyone can agree on?
What in /prog/ opinion is an all around great language. Something that you all can collectively agree on(if thats possible).

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 15:41

Scheme, BBCODE.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 15:46

Lurk more.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 15:46

All languages have some redeeming qualities, I just like to start fights with people over the internet

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 15:47

ASM
This isn't a language. I don't think anyone on /prog/ hates ASM. They just don't like using it.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 15:48

Lurking, curious to see where this goes.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 15:51

http://code.google.com/p/anic/

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 15:51

>>5
OP here, you know what I mean.
I have still seen lots of hate on asm like this:

>2011
>ASM

In that exact wording/format basically.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 15:53

>>7
Looks very cool actually.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 15:57

>>8
Be wary of posts with memes and disregard any post using a /g/ meme. ``>2011'' is a /g/ meme.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 16:06

````>2011'' is a /g/ meme.'' is a /g/ meme.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 16:13

``````>2011'' is a /g/ meme.'' is a /g/ meme'' is a /g/ meme.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 16:19

>>2
Scheme is fucking shit.
BBcode is shit.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 16:24

>>13
Your shit

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 16:29

>>14
Not mine.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 16:35

>>13
>>14

[OP here]
This is exactly what I'm talking about. Someone says one language and every shits all over it. There seems to be no language that's good.

>>EVERYONE
If you think a language is shit, don't use it. Or better yet, write your own and see if you can do better.
I know you cant please eveyone but really. Fuck.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 16:48

>>16
If you think a language is shit, don't use it. Or better yet, write your own and see if you can do better.
As a goy, you have no choice. You have to use what your jewish master order you to use and in most cases you dont write your own code, but maintain some legacy crap.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 16:51

I don't think anyone on /prog/ hates lisp

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 16:55

>>18
Disproven.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 19:46

>>16
Modern /prog/ users think every programming language is bad because programming in them is hard, because they can't program.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 20:23

>>7
GNU GPL v3

Nice try, stallman

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 22:35

>>21
Wait, is he trying to make all works created with it under the GPL?

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 23:52

>>22
I see nothing on that page stating works created with anic have to fall under the gplv3, but I'm certain FOSS can't limit what the user is allowed to create with it. I think that poster is 'implying' that anything under the gplv3 is created by stallman.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-15 23:57

>>2
BBCode. Nobody hates on it. Also, no one has hated on postscript either, to my knowledge.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-16 0:13

Perl 6. It has an operator to circumvent criticism. It's just not implemented yet.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-16 0:33

Brainfuck is the shit. Nobody hates it here.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-16 1:22

I like C++ and Python, and I acknowledge their flaws. However, forced indentation is not one of them (for Python), and I wish every language had it.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-16 1:32

>>27
Try to generate some Python code on the fly and you'll see how wrong you are.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-16 1:34

>>23
Nope. see:
Portably written using the GNU toolchain

Anyone claiming that the GNU toolchain is even remotely portable is either autismal as fuck or a GNU/Zealot.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-16 5:06

+1 subscribe

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-16 5:17

B O N E R L A N G

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-16 6:28

>>29
It's too portable. The fact that they try to make it run on everything to spread the word of GNU®-brand free software™ is one of the reasons its source code is so riddled with macros to the point where it's unreadable.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-16 6:40

>>32
its source code is so riddled with macros to the point where it's unreadable
RMS likes Lisp.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-16 6:49

>>33
http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Source-Language.html#Source-Language
>in general it is much better to use C, rather than the comparable alternatives.
>C has one advantage over other compiled languages: more people know C
>the best language to use is C. Using another language is like using a non-standard feature: it will cause trouble for users.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-16 7:48

>>27
Did anybody ask which languages you like?

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-16 9:25

>>34
There's a difference between recommending C as a matter of practicality and having a fondness for Lisp.

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-16 9:33

your preferred language shows what you think is important. If it's Lisp or another highly dynamic language, it means you think pragmatic abstraction is important. If it's Haskell or another highly static language, it means you think modeling the problem mathematically is important. If it's C++, it means you think your job security is important

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-16 9:54

>>36
But Lisp is more practical than C/C++!

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-16 9:57

>>32
Why yes. And it supports POSIX only - try to run autohell on Windows, without installing cygwin or MSYS (although the latter is something I can deal with, due to less retardedness).

Still, CMake. CMake, or just plain Makefiles (which, when written well, will work flawlessly with MinGW).

Name: sage 2011-10-16 15:04

>>38
Pfffffffff...mhehwhwawheaeah!
Good one, mate!

Name: Anonymous 2011-10-16 23:32

analbeads
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 -