no comment

IRIX/Nekoware development, porting and related topics.
Forum rules
Any posts concerning pirated software or offering to buy/sell/trade commercial software are subject to removal.
User avatar
hamei
Posts: 10481
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: over the rainbow

no comment

Unread postby hamei » Fri Jan 06, 2006 8:44 pm


User avatar
VenomousPinecone
Posts: 2180
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 2:10 pm
Location: Groom Lake, NV

Unread postby VenomousPinecone » Fri Jan 06, 2006 10:51 pm

Barnum was right, but the phrase for my generation was the idiom of a car salesman: "There is a ass for every seat".

Funny thing is, windows is worse than a practical joke (if true).

User avatar
lisp
Posts: 274
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 5:23 am
Location: England
Contact:

Unread postby lisp » Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:14 am

Parody or not, most of the points still stand.

C and all of it's derivatives are abominations. Unix shackles most programs to 1960s technology - just look at the laughable state of threading.
--
lisa

User avatar
lewis
Posts: 547
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 12:30 pm
Location: london
Contact:

Unread postby lewis » Sat Jan 07, 2006 11:23 am

How is it laughable?

User avatar
Alver
Posts: 773
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 4:46 pm
Location: Wetteren, Belgium
Contact:

Unread postby Alver » Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:11 pm

C: a cross-platform PDP-11 assembler... but still probably the most powerful language around, whether it's a complete PITA to use or not.
while (!asleep()) sheep++;

User avatar
squeen
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined: Fri May 09, 2003 6:10 am
Location: Maryland, USA

Unread postby squeen » Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:25 pm

Am I stupid? (Don't answer that! :)) I just *love* C. Its simplicity. Its power. I can't stand layers of abstraction if they can be avoided.

Just like the OpenGL programming manual defines it in its glossary:

God's programming language.

User avatar
hamei
Posts: 10481
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: over the rainbow

Unread postby hamei » Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:55 pm

squeen wrote:Just like the OpenGL programming manual defines it in its glossary:

God's programming language.


Nah, that was FORTRAN. That's why the week is only six columns wide, then we get a day off :-)

User avatar
lisp
Posts: 274
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 5:23 am
Location: England
Contact:

Unread postby lisp » Sun Jan 08, 2006 2:14 am

Alver wrote:C: a cross-platform PDP-11 assembler... but still probably the most powerful language around, whether it's a complete PITA to use or not.


Nonsense - anything LISP derived shows up C as the exceedingly weak and awful language it is.
--

lisa

User avatar
lisp
Posts: 274
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 5:23 am
Location: England
Contact:

Unread postby lisp » Sun Jan 08, 2006 2:17 am

lewis wrote:How is it laughable?


The primitives are exactly that - primitive. There's 30 years worth of research into better methods of locking and multitasking. All ignored because the Lowest Common Denominator (i.e. POSIX) has no support for them.

Programmers are lazy, and for the most part, incompetent - they'll muddle around fscking it up trying to used outmoded techniques rather than implement the modern techniques on top. The only way round this inherent flaw in programmers is to provide the functionality as standard at a higher level, but no one will use it because it's not present in the Lowest Common Denominator.
--

lisa

User avatar
lisp
Posts: 274
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 5:23 am
Location: England
Contact:

Unread postby lisp » Sun Jan 08, 2006 2:19 am

squeen wrote:Am I stupid? (Don't answer that! :)) I just *love* C. Its simplicity. Its power. I can't stand layers of abstraction if they can be avoided.


I think you've answered your own question ;P

Anyone who thinks C is powerful has obviously never had the luxury of a language with closures, first class functions, lambda expressions or even nestable function scoping.

Just like the OpenGL programming manual defines it in its glossary:
God's programming language.


I won't get on to my opinion of those with religious convictions :P
--

lisa

User avatar
Alver
Posts: 773
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 4:46 pm
Location: Wetteren, Belgium
Contact:

Unread postby Alver » Sun Jan 08, 2006 7:17 am

lisp wrote:Programmers are lazy, and for the most part, incompetent - they'll muddle around fscking it up trying to used outmoded techniques rather than implement the modern techniques on top. The only way round this inherent flaw in programmers is to provide the functionality as standard at a higher level, but no one will use it because it's not present in the Lowest Common Denominator.


I wouldn't call it a flaw... rather built-in masochism :P It's a total pain to create high-level apps in C, but it can be done without TOO much hassles because of the gazillion libraries that exist.

Point remains, C was never intended to do what it does nowadays. GUIs in C? Well, the PDP coders propably didn't even know what a GUI was back then, but they'd call us crazy if they saw how things are done. C is very close to the hardware, and that's where it's at its best - driver stuff, middleware, etc. C *is* the most powerful language around from a language's point of view, because it can access all hardware directly without any restrictions. From a programmer's point of view it's a weakling since you can't use techniques that were common even twenty years ago.

(can we all agree on that one? :P)
while (!asleep()) sheep++;

User avatar
squeen
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined: Fri May 09, 2003 6:10 am
Location: Maryland, USA

Unread postby squeen » Sun Jan 08, 2006 10:47 am

lisp wrote:
squeen wrote:Am I stupid? (Don't answer that! :)) I just *love* C. Its simplicity. Its power. I can't stand layers of abstraction if they can be avoided.


I think you've answered your own question ;P

Anyone who thinks C is powerful has obviously never had the luxury of a language with closures, first class functions, lambda expressions or even nestable function scoping.

Just like the OpenGL programming manual defines it in its glossary:
God's programming language.


I won't get on to my opinion of those with religious convictions :P


touche! :)

Agreed. I've only ever used C++, FORTRAN, Pascal, BASIC, and MATLAB's butched language. I've used a little lisp, but never felt much at home there either. I would like to know what "first class functions and lamda expressions (Lagrange multipliers?)" are, but again it's the flatness of C that appeals. Mainly, it C++ and it's derivatives that repulse me. (Overloading--good gravy!).

I also like Motif. :shock:
Arguing that Java is better than C++ is like arguing that grasshoppers taste better than tree bark.
- Thant Tessman

I invented the term Object-Oriented, and I can tell you I did not have C++ in mind. - Alan Kay

User avatar
lisp
Posts: 274
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 5:23 am
Location: England
Contact:

Unread postby lisp » Sun Jan 08, 2006 2:35 pm

squeen wrote:I would like to know what "first class functions and lamda expressions (Lagrange multipliers?)" are


I'll let wikipedia explain them, because my explanations will suck.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-class_function
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambda_calculus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closure_%28computer_science%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hygienic_macro
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S_expression

Scheme isn't object oriented, but it's trivial to add the capability, and make it pretty much seamless. It doesn't have coroutines, but these too can be added. Want prolog style backtracking? Few lines of code, and it's as if it was designed into the language in the first place. It has a macro system so powerful that you can redefine almost any aspect of the language to suit your application.

It should be taken into account that Scheme is a member of the Lisp family - about the second high level language to be created, way before C. The fact we're still using something as primitive as C as the primary computer language would be sickening if I weren't so desensitised to the stupidity of the world! :)
--

lisa

Ravege
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 1:43 pm

Unread postby Ravege » Sun Jan 08, 2006 6:13 pm

Mainly, it C++ and it's derivatives that repulse me.

We've been an Ada shop where I work for sometime, but some new projects we've started developing are required C++ - just about everyone of us is ready to hang ourselves :x

Our principle software is a Kalman filter for tracking satellites written in Ada with a GUI component oringinally in C/Motif and then C++. The Ada part is about 90% of total written lines, yet about 60% of all bugs being written are against the C/C++ side :? Stability standpoint alone, going from Ada to C++ reminds me of moving from Unix (SCO) to NT/W2k: it took some effort to break SCO while Windows was very willing to barf on its own accord (not to say what we do is representative of most programming today).

Unix shackles most programs to 1960s technology - just look at the laughable state of threading.

Hear hear, the only reliable way our software could break SCO :wink:

User avatar
lisp
Posts: 274
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 5:23 am
Location: England
Contact:

Unread postby lisp » Mon Jan 09, 2006 12:17 am

Ravege wrote:We've been an Ada shop where I work for sometime, but some new projects we've started developing are required C++ - just about everyone of us is ready to hang ourselves :x


Ah, Ada - my favourite language for other people to program in ;) Although despite it's BDSM nature, it's an excellent example of using the right technology for a job, and tends to have it built into the language, where it should be.
--

lisa


Return to “SGI: Development”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests