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

List the programming languages you know...

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-02 9:46

in the order you studied them and rate your experience with it.

C - too much focus on the language itself rather than the goal
Java - never again
C++ - it's like C and Java had sex together and Java commited abortion
Ruby - it was pretty much enjoyable despite the limited time I spent on it
Python - too easy, too slow
Scheme - too complicated for my shallow mind but I like it

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-03 13:16

>>119
Every Lisp function is a template.

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-03 13:17

>>121
And stuff like ((lambda (x) (+ 1 x)) 2) gets reduced to (+ 1 2) at compile time.

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-03 13:35

>>121
>>122
You can always count on a lisp-retoid to screw up even the most basic programming concepts. No wonder they advertize their turds so much — they just don't understand jack shit in any other programming langueage.

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-03 13:48

>>123
What's your favorite linked data structure?

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-03 13:53

>>124
One that works

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-03 13:59

>>124

Red black trees, simple to implement and efficient in functional languages.

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-03 13:59

Everyday I'm haskelling
Everyday I'm haskelling
Everyday I'm haskelling
Everyday I'm haskelling

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-03 14:00

>>126
Red *African American trees

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-03 14:03

>>125
All of them work.

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-03 14:21

>>123
$ sbcl
This is SBCL 1.0.57.0.debian, an implementation of ANSI Common Lisp.
More information about SBCL is available at <http://www.sbcl.org/>;.

SBCL is free software, provided as is, with absolutely no warranty.
It is mostly in the public domain; some portions are provided under
BSD-style licenses.  See the CREDITS and COPYING files in the
distribution for more information.
* (defun foo (x y) (if (= x y) (sin x) (* y (cos x))))

FOO
* (disassemble 'foo)

; disassembly for FOO
; 029D5F1D:       488B55F8         MOV RDX, [RBP-8]           ; no-arg-parsing entry point
;       21:       488B7DF0         MOV RDI, [RBP-16]
;       25:       488D0C2586040020 LEA RCX, [#x20000486]      ; GENERIC-=
;       2D:       FFD1             CALL RCX
;       2F:       743E             JEQ L0
;       31:       488D5C24F0       LEA RBX, [RSP-16]
;       36:       4883EC18         SUB RSP, 24
;       3A:       488B55F8         MOV RDX, [RBP-8]
;       3E:       488B057BFFFFFF   MOV RAX, [RIP-133]         ; #<FDEFINITION object for COS>
;       45:       B902000000       MOV ECX, 2
;       4A:       48892B           MOV [RBX], RBP
;       4D:       488BEB           MOV RBP, RBX
;       50:       FF5009           CALL QWORD PTR [RAX+9]
;       53:       488BFA           MOV RDI, RDX
;       56:       488B55F0         MOV RDX, [RBP-16]
;       5A:       4C8D1C25B9020020 LEA R11, [#x200002B9]      ; GENERIC-*
;       62:       41FFD3           CALL R11
;       65:       480F42E3         CMOVB RSP, RBX
;       69:       488BE5           MOV RSP, RBP
;       6C:       F8               CLC
;       6D:       5D               POP RBP
;       6E:       C3               RET
;       6F: L0:   488B55F8         MOV RDX, [RBP-8]
;       73:       488B054EFFFFFF   MOV RAX, [RIP-178]         ; #<FDEFINITION object for SIN>
;       7A:       B902000000       MOV ECX, 2
;       7F:       FF7508           PUSH QWORD PTR [RBP+8]
;       82:       FF6009           JMP QWORD PTR [RAX+9]
;       85:       CC0A             BREAK 10                   ; error trap
;       87:       02               BYTE #X02
;       88:       18               BYTE #X18                  ; INVALID-ARG-COUNT-ERROR
;       89:       54               BYTE #X54                  ; RCX
NIL
*
Stop being such an uneducated faggot, it's embarrassing.

>>129
Missing hard deadlines doesn't count.

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-03 16:36

>>130
;       73:       488B054EFFFFFF   MOV RAX, [RIP-178]         ; #<FDEFINITION object for SIN>
Functions like sine and cosine are implemented in microcode inside microprocessors. Intel chips, for example, have assembly instructions for these. Yet SBCL calls some inefficient pointer.

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-03 16:38

>>130
That is some bad and inefficient code. It is so bad, that even a good interpreter would probably be faster.

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-03 20:37

>>131
Prove me you ain't no toilet scrubber: If you know "microcode inside microprocessors" so well, why do you think it's done like this?

>>132
Okay, of course, try it.

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 1:38

>>130
No it's not a template, you idiot, it's relies on runtime casts depending on the types of x and y. And deforestation has nothing to do with templates, you moron. Just go fuck yourself.

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 2:42

stop talking like that about templates. Anything that can be trivially emulated using the c preprocessor doesn't deserve mention.

Name: Cudder !MhMRSATORI!fR8duoqGZdD/iE5 2013-06-04 3:26

Compilers are stupid, end of argument.

>>130
Try the 32-bit version. AMD64 is bloat.

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 3:33

>>135
C preprocessor is just text substitution, it doesn't do any typechecking at all. Better to have unreadable multipage error reports like C++ templates give you than nothing.

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 3:34

>>136
Yeah, compilers are so stupid. Everybody who isn't writing hand-coded x86 assembly is a moron. You and Terry A. Davis are the only smart programmers in the world. Oh, wait, Terry wrote a compiler in 64-bit assembly, so I guess he's a moron too. Congratulations, you're the only smart person on earth! Too bad you've never created jack shit!

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 4:00

>>137
the error messages I get from my template implementation are just as informative to me as  what I would get from gcc or msvc. I guess the distinction between different constant types and typenames is a form of type checking that can't be done with the cpp alone, but that isn't that much of an improvement. You can't place constraints on classes in template arguments using c++ templates.

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 4:05

but isn't coding in C ~= coding in assembly if you wrote the compiler?

Name: Cudder !MhMRSATORI!fR8duoqGZdD/iE5 2013-06-04 4:07

>>138
We should certainly be putting a lot more effort into more intelligent compilers. A human can still easily beat one today, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't be using compilers --- they're many orders of magnitude faster, and when you just want to ship product that works, the value tradeoff is obvious. I'm hardly an "Asm or nothing" fundamentalist. It's a similar deal with machine translation, and you can definitely say I'm NOT a fundie there!

U MAD?

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 5:23

>>139
I laugh at the suffering of the poor programmers who still have to deal with C++. Just as the C++ committee laughs at them as it gives them a glimmer of hope that at least C++11 will have concepts, modules and relection, and then don't include them so the poor dopes will still have to deal with this archaic, monstrous and dangerous algol derivative that is C++.

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 6:48

>>141
I'm hardly an "Asm or nothing" fundamentalist.
Yeah. You're "x86 or nothing" Jew.

Why do you hate RISC so much, Cudderberg?

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 6:53

>>142
C++11 added auto keyword, which GCC and MSVC supported for years in the for of typeof. At least now you can use it officially.

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 7:27

>>144
Ooh, that changes everything! What next, elementary type inference that D has had for ages? Ahahahaha poor schmucks.
I'm waiting for C++14 to see what features they'll promise and not include this time.

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 7:30

C++++++++++++++++?

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 7:37

It's year 2013 and poor C++fags still cannot express type constraints in their templates.
Meanwhile, May 2013 was the first time a C++11-compliant compiler was released.
http://isocpp.org/blog/2013/05/gcc-4.8.1-released-c11-feature-complete

Name: Cudder !MhMRSATORI!fR8duoqGZdD/iE5 2013-06-04 7:54

>>143
I don't hate RISC, I hate the idiots who think it's the ultimate solution for performance. It's for low-end, ultra-low-area low-power applications.

"The instructions are simpler, so we can increase the clock frequency higher. Memory bandwidth is no issue, caches always work."? Even Intel bought into that shit --- and Netburst was the result! Ultra-RISCy microarchitecture, and even with a memory bandwidth/code density advantage over "pure RISC" with its x86 decoder, and with Intel's superior process tech they still couldn't get to the clock frequencies they wanted. Fortunately they learned from that mistake and went back to their ways with the Core.

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 11:12

>>148
still couldn't get to the clock frequencies they wanted
say thanks to x86

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 19:44

>>149
x64 > x86

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 19:56

>>150
Not true for any value of x

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 19:59

>>151
Your a idiot

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 20:02

>>151
What about negatives?

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 20:07

>>153
Jewish invention.

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 20:10

>>154
Negative numbers appeared for the first time in history in the Nine Chapters on the Mathematical Art, which in its present form dates from the period of the Chinese Han Dynasty (202 BC – AD 220), but may well contain much older material.[2] Indian mathematicians developed consistent and correct rules on the use of negative numbers, which later spread to the Middle East, and then into Europe
Very Jewish indeed. Of course, you can't strap a negative number of dynamite rods to your ass.

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 20:48

If negative numbers are so cool, then why can't you take a square root?

Scoreboard: {Nikita: OVER 9000; JEWS: -1}

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 20:53

i
Scoreboard:
* ILLALLALALALLAHMUHAMADURKASALAMIBOOM: 0
* G-d's chosen: i

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 20:58

If negative numbers don't exist then how does a battery work?

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 21:41

How does an electron know what charge is?

Name: Anonymous 2013-06-04 21:58

>>159
All the electrons that couldn't tell what charge they were were eaten by protons, so the electron evolved the ability to detect it's own charge.
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 -