These languages are a bundle of nope.
-
There are languages I refuse to use for fear of picking up bad habits. Perl is one. Python* is another. And then there's BASIC :~ I'd add assembly to the list except there are unfortunately, rare instances where I need it. *Python isn't as bad an offender as the others, but its array handling and use of significant whitespace are deal breakers for me. I don't like to holy roll. Sure I have my favorite languages (C++, C#) and languages I hate but grudgingly accept (like Javascript), and ones that just aren't my cup of tea but I'll use them if I must (Java). Still, I try to be fair, and I believe that most languages have their niche. Even Perl, if I'm being generous, but that doesn't mean I'll use it and it doesn't mean I don't think there should be a better alternative. The ones I listed up top though - Nope. Just no. I will not use them, except perhaps to port something away from them. I have to have some sort of standards. Sometimes I wonder if I'm being overly picky though.
Real programmers use butterflies
honey the codewitch wrote:
I'd add assembly to the list except there are unfortunately, rare instances where I need it.
Assembly language is probably the best example of choosing the right tool for the job. Based on your hardware environment and your finances, sometimes assembly language will be your only reasonable choice. At one time the embedded business model was based on providing an assembler and minimal debugger for free, and higher-level languages and IDE's at an exhorbitant cost. I believe my employer is still paying several thousands of dollars a year to G.H. to support C programming on the embedded boards in our products.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
There are languages I refuse to use for fear of picking up bad habits. Perl is one. Python* is another. And then there's BASIC :~ I'd add assembly to the list except there are unfortunately, rare instances where I need it. *Python isn't as bad an offender as the others, but its array handling and use of significant whitespace are deal breakers for me. I don't like to holy roll. Sure I have my favorite languages (C++, C#) and languages I hate but grudgingly accept (like Javascript), and ones that just aren't my cup of tea but I'll use them if I must (Java). Still, I try to be fair, and I believe that most languages have their niche. Even Perl, if I'm being generous, but that doesn't mean I'll use it and it doesn't mean I don't think there should be a better alternative. The ones I listed up top though - Nope. Just no. I will not use them, except perhaps to port something away from them. I have to have some sort of standards. Sometimes I wonder if I'm being overly picky though.
Real programmers use butterflies
C# is the new BASIC: Top-level statements[^]
-
C# is the new BASIC: Top-level statements[^]
Yeah I'm not a fan of a lot of the language additions since 8.
Real programmers use butterflies
-
I don't disagree that assembly is fun. It just isn't conducive to me keeping up good coding habits. I'm not sure how much we actually disagree with there. And I'm not so worried, except for the fact that I don't want to get too stuck by being stubborn. We seem to agree for the most part, at least conceptually, although we have slightly different views on some languages. I don't think VB.NET is much better than BASIC. It might be worse, as it's no longer beginners, but it still encourages crappy coding. I should add with regard to assembly: I've found it's more fun (in terms of the challenge) to get C++ to generate the assembly I want (or better)
Real programmers use butterflies
honey the codewitch wrote:
I don't think VB.NET is much better than BASIC. It might be worse, as it's no longer beginners, but it still encourages crappy coding.
If MS would stop supporting all the backwards compatibility that they allow in VB.NET, then it would be a much more robust language and be a lot closer to C# than it is now. But really, having personally made the switch from VB.NET to C#, the reality is that C# is generally better on the long term. I completely understand why it still has a massive following as BASIC as an overall syntax was and still is, everywhere. Most people who are in their 40s or 50s and took programming in high school would have done so either on something from Commodore or on a DOS PC using QBASIC. But the argument that VB.NET is better for RAD in business environments isn't nearly as true as it may once have been. And just because C# is better, don't forget that it still has its own quirks that are kind of dumb.
-
There are languages I refuse to use for fear of picking up bad habits. Perl is one. Python* is another. And then there's BASIC :~ I'd add assembly to the list except there are unfortunately, rare instances where I need it. *Python isn't as bad an offender as the others, but its array handling and use of significant whitespace are deal breakers for me. I don't like to holy roll. Sure I have my favorite languages (C++, C#) and languages I hate but grudgingly accept (like Javascript), and ones that just aren't my cup of tea but I'll use them if I must (Java). Still, I try to be fair, and I believe that most languages have their niche. Even Perl, if I'm being generous, but that doesn't mean I'll use it and it doesn't mean I don't think there should be a better alternative. The ones I listed up top though - Nope. Just no. I will not use them, except perhaps to port something away from them. I have to have some sort of standards. Sometimes I wonder if I'm being overly picky though.
Real programmers use butterflies
C# is like building a car from a kit. Java is like machining you own parts to build a car. C# is a RAD environment best meant for business applications. Java in not a RAD environment, and is for people who like to putz.
-
honey the codewitch wrote:
I don't think VB.NET is much better than BASIC. It might be worse, as it's no longer beginners, but it still encourages crappy coding.
While VB.Net has some serious syntactic shortcomings when it comes to Lambda functions and LinQ, apply the two statements below eliminates all the crappy coding relating to variable and type declarations.
Option Strict On
Option Explicit OnI find the C# "var" variable declaration to be an abomination as it allows the programmer to not understand data types they're using. I also find the use of { and } for code blocking to be a threat to clean coding. In fact, the 2003 power outage that impacted New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Ontario was the direct result of an erroneously placed }. This type of code bug is much harder to miss in VB because the language uses keywords to start and end code blocks.
>>I find the C# "var" variable declaration to be an abomination Could not agree more, was appalled when I first saw that in code examples.
-
There are languages I refuse to use for fear of picking up bad habits. Perl is one. Python* is another. And then there's BASIC :~ I'd add assembly to the list except there are unfortunately, rare instances where I need it. *Python isn't as bad an offender as the others, but its array handling and use of significant whitespace are deal breakers for me. I don't like to holy roll. Sure I have my favorite languages (C++, C#) and languages I hate but grudgingly accept (like Javascript), and ones that just aren't my cup of tea but I'll use them if I must (Java). Still, I try to be fair, and I believe that most languages have their niche. Even Perl, if I'm being generous, but that doesn't mean I'll use it and it doesn't mean I don't think there should be a better alternative. The ones I listed up top though - Nope. Just no. I will not use them, except perhaps to port something away from them. I have to have some sort of standards. Sometimes I wonder if I'm being overly picky though.
Real programmers use butterflies
I took a real good look at python and still use it with my Raspberry PI's but i dont really like it, it's like turning the clock back to the late 70's/early 80's with interpreted basic and i too dont like the whitespace thing, but i would take a bit of an issue with basic, especially VB.NET as although i code mainly in c# now, most of my major projects over the past 40 years have been in basic and basic like languages, many obsolete now, and sure, you can see some horrific code, but with discipline you can also write great code, and it aint that too disimilar to c# for a lot of tasks anyway. IMHO the art of the programmer counts for more than the language per-se. GL
-
There are languages I refuse to use for fear of picking up bad habits. Perl is one. Python* is another. And then there's BASIC :~ I'd add assembly to the list except there are unfortunately, rare instances where I need it. *Python isn't as bad an offender as the others, but its array handling and use of significant whitespace are deal breakers for me. I don't like to holy roll. Sure I have my favorite languages (C++, C#) and languages I hate but grudgingly accept (like Javascript), and ones that just aren't my cup of tea but I'll use them if I must (Java). Still, I try to be fair, and I believe that most languages have their niche. Even Perl, if I'm being generous, but that doesn't mean I'll use it and it doesn't mean I don't think there should be a better alternative. The ones I listed up top though - Nope. Just no. I will not use them, except perhaps to port something away from them. I have to have some sort of standards. Sometimes I wonder if I'm being overly picky though.
Real programmers use butterflies
Who cares What you think? :zzz: If you don't have the mental discipline or fortitude to reject picking up those "bad habits" then shame on you. IMO your post is just an opportunity to brag about ALL of the languages you know and use, and bash languages others use like the "cool kids". Languages are just tools. If you mash your thumb with a hammer, is it the hammer's fault?
Use the language you like. Ignore the "cool kids"
-
There are languages I refuse to use for fear of picking up bad habits. Perl is one. Python* is another. And then there's BASIC :~ I'd add assembly to the list except there are unfortunately, rare instances where I need it. *Python isn't as bad an offender as the others, but its array handling and use of significant whitespace are deal breakers for me. I don't like to holy roll. Sure I have my favorite languages (C++, C#) and languages I hate but grudgingly accept (like Javascript), and ones that just aren't my cup of tea but I'll use them if I must (Java). Still, I try to be fair, and I believe that most languages have their niche. Even Perl, if I'm being generous, but that doesn't mean I'll use it and it doesn't mean I don't think there should be a better alternative. The ones I listed up top though - Nope. Just no. I will not use them, except perhaps to port something away from them. I have to have some sort of standards. Sometimes I wonder if I'm being overly picky though.
Real programmers use butterflies
VisualBasic.Net said to C#... Anything you can do so can I. I can even do some things you can't. I also give credit where credit is due so there are things you can do that I can't. That's mostly because there is an ongoing attempt to kill Visual Basic so that C# has no competition and keeps a top spot in the preferred programming languages lists. Simply said, Why pay a C# programmer 80K plus for application development when you can get a high school grad to do the same in Visual Basic for 40K. People have been basing VB for years simply because they do not understand the full power and flexibility of the language. Every time I see one of these posts, It brings a tear to my eyes to think people love to bash something they obviously know nothing about.
-
There are languages I refuse to use for fear of picking up bad habits. Perl is one. Python* is another. And then there's BASIC :~ I'd add assembly to the list except there are unfortunately, rare instances where I need it. *Python isn't as bad an offender as the others, but its array handling and use of significant whitespace are deal breakers for me. I don't like to holy roll. Sure I have my favorite languages (C++, C#) and languages I hate but grudgingly accept (like Javascript), and ones that just aren't my cup of tea but I'll use them if I must (Java). Still, I try to be fair, and I believe that most languages have their niche. Even Perl, if I'm being generous, but that doesn't mean I'll use it and it doesn't mean I don't think there should be a better alternative. The ones I listed up top though - Nope. Just no. I will not use them, except perhaps to port something away from them. I have to have some sort of standards. Sometimes I wonder if I'm being overly picky though.
Real programmers use butterflies
-
Who cares What you think? :zzz: If you don't have the mental discipline or fortitude to reject picking up those "bad habits" then shame on you. IMO your post is just an opportunity to brag about ALL of the languages you know and use, and bash languages others use like the "cool kids". Languages are just tools. If you mash your thumb with a hammer, is it the hammer's fault?
Use the language you like. Ignore the "cool kids"
Wow, what crawled up your backside? You're wrong about my intentions, and all you managed to accomplish was to be a jerk to someone that has never done anything to you. And I'll remember it. So congratulations. Smart move.
Real programmers use butterflies
-
VisualBasic.Net said to C#... Anything you can do so can I. I can even do some things you can't. I also give credit where credit is due so there are things you can do that I can't. That's mostly because there is an ongoing attempt to kill Visual Basic so that C# has no competition and keeps a top spot in the preferred programming languages lists. Simply said, Why pay a C# programmer 80K plus for application development when you can get a high school grad to do the same in Visual Basic for 40K. People have been basing VB for years simply because they do not understand the full power and flexibility of the language. Every time I see one of these posts, It brings a tear to my eyes to think people love to bash something they obviously know nothing about.
Pretty sure I understand the language considering I've written parsers for both. Let me help you understand something - they're the same language. The only thing different is some superficial syntax. However, VB.NET's is not clean. C#s is. If anyone is paying a C# dev twice what they're paying a VB.NET give me their number. I have a bridge to sell them.
Real programmers use butterflies
-
C# is like building a car from a kit. Java is like machining you own parts to build a car. C# is a RAD environment best meant for business applications. Java in not a RAD environment, and is for people who like to putz.
I agree with your last two sentences, but not the first two, which seem to imply some fundamental differences in the actual language between Java and C# that aren't really all that different. C# isn't higher level than java. They both operate from about the same place in the programming stack. *hides*
Real programmers use butterflies
-
There are languages I refuse to use for fear of picking up bad habits. Perl is one. Python* is another. And then there's BASIC :~ I'd add assembly to the list except there are unfortunately, rare instances where I need it. *Python isn't as bad an offender as the others, but its array handling and use of significant whitespace are deal breakers for me. I don't like to holy roll. Sure I have my favorite languages (C++, C#) and languages I hate but grudgingly accept (like Javascript), and ones that just aren't my cup of tea but I'll use them if I must (Java). Still, I try to be fair, and I believe that most languages have their niche. Even Perl, if I'm being generous, but that doesn't mean I'll use it and it doesn't mean I don't think there should be a better alternative. The ones I listed up top though - Nope. Just no. I will not use them, except perhaps to port something away from them. I have to have some sort of standards. Sometimes I wonder if I'm being overly picky though.
Real programmers use butterflies
i'd like to master perl5. feels fun like js5. sadly, there is little hope things will change in the time department.
-
There are languages I refuse to use for fear of picking up bad habits. Perl is one. Python* is another. And then there's BASIC :~ I'd add assembly to the list except there are unfortunately, rare instances where I need it. *Python isn't as bad an offender as the others, but its array handling and use of significant whitespace are deal breakers for me. I don't like to holy roll. Sure I have my favorite languages (C++, C#) and languages I hate but grudgingly accept (like Javascript), and ones that just aren't my cup of tea but I'll use them if I must (Java). Still, I try to be fair, and I believe that most languages have their niche. Even Perl, if I'm being generous, but that doesn't mean I'll use it and it doesn't mean I don't think there should be a better alternative. The ones I listed up top though - Nope. Just no. I will not use them, except perhaps to port something away from them. I have to have some sort of standards. Sometimes I wonder if I'm being overly picky though.
Real programmers use butterflies
BASIC has grown over the years and is no longer the beginners language it once was thought to be. Basic started out as an interpreter because it was the only way to produce a multi-tasking system back in the 1970's. While Fortran programmers had to punch cards and wait until the computer dept. had time to run their code, hundreds of Basic programmers were coding and getting immediate results on terminal all around the college. Basic introduces the old computing world to time sharing and it actually was an amazing tool for its time. In the 1980's Basic became a compiler rather than simply an interpreter. Microsoft embraced Basic with its QuickBasic and then PDS 7.1 (Professional Basic). One could code apps in Basic and link into modules written in Assembler, C or other languages. Notice Microsoft called their version of Basic , Professional ! In the 1980's Basic took on many of the best features found in other languages such as Pascal. Modular code design became the norm and the command set grew to embrace many modern constructs. In the 1990's with the advent of Windows, Basic took a big hit at first until Microsoft bought a visual development tool from another company and turned it into Visual Basic. Classic VB was not built from the grown up, so it lost many of the powerful features of its DOS ancestor (PDS 7.1). It was a pcode compiler, not a true compiler. It lost many of its low level features. The one saving grace was the visual drag and drop environment and that is why it became so popular. It was years ahead of other languages when it came to drag and drop, but it did not take long for other languages to catch up. C was a little slow to catch up, but Delphi (Pascal for Windows) caught up and for awhile was a popular language for those who wanted the drag and drop of VB, but the power of C. Microsoft spent years playing catch up trying to bring VB forward and in the end (VB 5/6) they were only able to make it a true machine code compiler by using a C backend. VB itself never was a true compiler (meaning they had to use a different backend to accomplish it, rather than make VB itself a real compiler. Yet, it still was popular because of not only its drag and drop environment, but also because of its support of ActiveX and then later OCX controls. But those custom components usually were written in C, not VB. VB was not a true native code compiler in the sense you could not compile to a real native code DLL usable by other languages (ActiveX DLL's were not the same). This did not mean that Basic tot
-
BASIC has grown over the years and is no longer the beginners language it once was thought to be. Basic started out as an interpreter because it was the only way to produce a multi-tasking system back in the 1970's. While Fortran programmers had to punch cards and wait until the computer dept. had time to run their code, hundreds of Basic programmers were coding and getting immediate results on terminal all around the college. Basic introduces the old computing world to time sharing and it actually was an amazing tool for its time. In the 1980's Basic became a compiler rather than simply an interpreter. Microsoft embraced Basic with its QuickBasic and then PDS 7.1 (Professional Basic). One could code apps in Basic and link into modules written in Assembler, C or other languages. Notice Microsoft called their version of Basic , Professional ! In the 1980's Basic took on many of the best features found in other languages such as Pascal. Modular code design became the norm and the command set grew to embrace many modern constructs. In the 1990's with the advent of Windows, Basic took a big hit at first until Microsoft bought a visual development tool from another company and turned it into Visual Basic. Classic VB was not built from the grown up, so it lost many of the powerful features of its DOS ancestor (PDS 7.1). It was a pcode compiler, not a true compiler. It lost many of its low level features. The one saving grace was the visual drag and drop environment and that is why it became so popular. It was years ahead of other languages when it came to drag and drop, but it did not take long for other languages to catch up. C was a little slow to catch up, but Delphi (Pascal for Windows) caught up and for awhile was a popular language for those who wanted the drag and drop of VB, but the power of C. Microsoft spent years playing catch up trying to bring VB forward and in the end (VB 5/6) they were only able to make it a true machine code compiler by using a C backend. VB itself never was a true compiler (meaning they had to use a different backend to accomplish it, rather than make VB itself a real compiler. Yet, it still was popular because of not only its drag and drop environment, but also because of its support of ActiveX and then later OCX controls. But those custom components usually were written in C, not VB. VB was not a true native code compiler in the sense you could not compile to a real native code DLL usable by other languages (ActiveX DLL's were not the same). This did not mean that Basic tot
VB.NET and C# have the same exact functionality. My criticism isn't about BASIC not being powerful. It's about it reinforcing poor habits due to the way it's structured and due to its syntax.
Real programmers use butterflies
-
I agree with your last two sentences, but not the first two, which seem to imply some fundamental differences in the actual language between Java and C# that aren't really all that different. C# isn't higher level than java. They both operate from about the same place in the programming stack. *hides*
Real programmers use butterflies
If you use WinForms, compare adding a ListBox in C# and creating one in Java. It's ridiculous. Let me clarify - I was mainly referring to IDE RAD based development. Sure, the syntax is similar. It also eats memory like a pig. Once I built the same application in .NET and in JBuilder. When I ran the app. in JBuilder, it told me I had insufficient memory. Really?
-
honey the codewitch wrote:
I don't think VB.NET is much better than BASIC. It might be worse, as it's no longer beginners, but it still encourages crappy coding.
While VB.Net has some serious syntactic shortcomings when it comes to Lambda functions and LinQ, apply the two statements below eliminates all the crappy coding relating to variable and type declarations.
Option Strict On
Option Explicit OnI find the C# "var" variable declaration to be an abomination as it allows the programmer to not understand data types they're using. I also find the use of { and } for code blocking to be a threat to clean coding. In fact, the 2003 power outage that impacted New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Ontario was the direct result of an erroneously placed }. This type of code bug is much harder to miss in VB because the language uses keywords to start and end code blocks.
I think there are some legitimate uses for var. I use it in generic methods that have incoming objects and I have to iterate through using reflection.
-
If you use WinForms, compare adding a ListBox in C# and creating one in Java. It's ridiculous. Let me clarify - I was mainly referring to IDE RAD based development. Sure, the syntax is similar. It also eats memory like a pig. Once I built the same application in .NET and in JBuilder. When I ran the app. in JBuilder, it told me I had insufficient memory. Really?
I avoid Java because the tools are awful.
Real programmers use butterflies
-
I avoid Java because the tools are awful.
Real programmers use butterflies
Yes. You get what you pay for. :-O