C# is for bed-wetting nancy types. C++ is the One True Language
-
I mean - it's been days since we've had a good religious fight about languages...
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
Those who can C C++, those who can't, read about C# Real programmers engrave the silicon! :cool:
-
While C++ are still coding what I've done faster in C#, I'm getting laid :)
Just as well you don't work on Windows, or did you?
-
You young'uns got it soft. Back in my day I had to write an entire database product using only 0s.
swmiller wrote:
You young'uns got it soft. Back in my day I had to write an entire database product using only 0s.
Yeah! I heard of that product. you called it freebase. I think instead of the product getting off the ground you must have, swmiller... Also, what a coincidence that your source codes indicate the number of people who used your database product. Not even you yourself found it useful! A sign over your office entrance that says "Yup, only 0 sold so far". "Whatever you be puffin on that got you thinkin that you supaman..."
-
OK, then it's been hours. Though VBScript is still the Prince of Languages...
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
-
I mean - it's been days since we've had a good religious fight about languages...
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
-
I mean - it's been days since we've had a good religious fight about languages...
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
You all are my heroes.
-
I've spent most of my career in Progress, and have been back in there a few times in recent days. Can I have a new forum just for me please.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
-
Just as well you don't work on Windows, or did you?
:confused:
-
Sorry, FORTH is the one true language. You can intermix low level assembler and high level FORTH. The language can be multitasking, not the OS. You can extend the compiler as you are compiling the program. Back in the early 90's I'd compile 300K programs in 30 seconds, while the C compiler would take hours. And the application could still be interactive allowing new commands to be created while the program was running instead of the old, tired, edit-compile-run cycle every time you needed to make a minor change. Unit testing is a breeze since each verb (command) is stack based, so no scaffolding is required, just load up the stack with the input parameters, run the command, check the stack for the expected output. Multiple programmers can work on their sections and then just zipper the different files together without fear of name collisions. A project I initially estimated would take 9 months was operational in 6 weeks because we were able to fling code at the wall and it all stuck.
Psychosis at 10 Film at 11
Ah yes, I remember implementing FORTH on a Motorola 6809 uCPU. Simple with the two stacks and the Next operator was just a JMP [Y++]. You could pack a lot of functionality in a couple of KiloBytes (not MBytes) of Battery Backed RAM. Mind you, writing a multi-tasking OS in Assembler and 20 Kb was fun. Matthew
-
I mean - it's been days since we've had a good religious fight about languages...
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
As Peter Sellers, as 'inspectur Clouseau' used to say: "I will say this only wunce...':: There is no 'one true language'. Language fights are so stupid. The quality of software is much more determined by proper design, coding practice and programming style, than by languages. Every language has its pro's and con's. Usually programmers idolize the language they know. They think that language is the best, because they can use it best.
-
As Peter Sellers, as 'inspectur Clouseau' used to say: "I will say this only wunce...':: There is no 'one true language'. Language fights are so stupid. The quality of software is much more determined by proper design, coding practice and programming style, than by languages. Every language has its pro's and con's. Usually programmers idolize the language they know. They think that language is the best, because they can use it best.
Unfortunately, programming style and programming languages go hand in hand. And the C++ die-hards feel revolted by the 'programming style' of deep inheritance hierarchies, stilted template support, and non-deterministic destructors that are the unfortunate result of language like Java and C#. C++ enthusiasts ARE actually supporting a programming style rather than the programming language. The problem is that C++ is the only language that supports this programming style. Of course, it IS true that Java/C# fanatics usually ONLY know how to suck milk from a feeder and wet their pampers because momma virtual machine is there to clean the shit after them. Doh!!!
-
Ah yes, I remember implementing FORTH on a Motorola 6809 uCPU. Simple with the two stacks and the Next operator was just a JMP [Y++]. You could pack a lot of functionality in a couple of KiloBytes (not MBytes) of Battery Backed RAM. Mind you, writing a multi-tasking OS in Assembler and 20 Kb was fun. Matthew
Oh yes, aside from the NOVIX chip, I heard that the 6809 was the perfect FORTH processor. I had a 6809 daughter board for my Apple II, but my employer was not keen on me doing anything his non-technical mind did not find a reason for, so I was not able to use the 6809 for anything other than the Pascal engine that came with the card. The Pascal was a total waste. It was intended to drive a database network (that used 6821 parallel chips for communications :wtf: ). I calculated the system choked at four users. Seems I have a habit of disappointing people by doing the math. But I did get to implement a version of FIG-FORTH on the Apple's 6502 processor. I had re-written the source code so it didn't use any stack tricks and designed it to work with the 80 column video cards (the Apple II was only 40 columns) that were on the market. Aside from a proprietary Z-80 version of FORTH that I did a game cartridge in, my major FORTH projects were doing real time interrupt driven conveyor controls in 16 and 32 bit FORTH within MS-DOS. For the 32 bit version, I modified the multitasker to support debugging (which task died) and priorities. Language vendor added my changes to their support site. But 32 bit protected mode 80386 FORTH was the bomb! Hard to convince people that FORTH can task switch faster than the machine instructions can. Fun days.
Psychosis at 10 Film at 11