What was your first programming language?
How would you know you old geezer? :-P
Actually, dinking with HGC and (S)VGA hardware is a large part of what got me into programming. I learned Assembly just so I could make GWBASIC (and later, C and Pascal) do extra cool stuff with the graphics.
I could probably still lay my hand on any piece of information about the thing in less than two seconds (and that includes standing up and getting the book of my shelf). If I even needed to. :-]
Actually, dinking with HGC and (S)VGA hardware is a large part of what got me into programming. I learned Assembly just so I could make GWBASIC (and later, C and Pascal) do extra cool stuff with the graphics.
I could probably still lay my hand on any piece of information about the thing in less than two seconds (and that includes standing up and getting the book of my shelf). If I even needed to. :-]
closed account (2EwbqMoL)
I think the first programming language I ever used was BASIC, Qbasic at first, then I screwed with a few odd basic compilers (one that was proprietary but I hacked the IDE and compiler with a hex editor bypassing the part about registering it)... there was also a Visual Basic Clone I screwed with called envelop
after awhile I found RapidQ, which was by far the most amazing BASIC language I've seen to this day. simpler and faster than VB and better compiled binaries... sadly that was a language that died.
before that I knew HTML/CSS, PHP, and some MySQL commands. Did a lot of web development, and made my own CMS for my site (no longer up). Did some hacks for a web forum script (acmlmboard) in my early days, my later works for that were never released because I stopped frequenting theior communities...
screwed around with TCL/TK which I thought were absolute gems. I loved them when I had my old slackware box. made simplified GUI scripts for applications like find, which I would use frequently if I had Xwindow problems and couldnt get any window managers running (when I used failsafe, which happened a lot lol) those languages are nice on windows too -- easiest GUI creation ever and good function, but not full-featured enough to do half the work of C++.
recently I learned a little bit of pascal, but I dropped it because I already knew more C++ (still not that much) but I may go back and learn it anyway -- the string capabilities make it more appealing than C/C++ to me for certain things...
but the language I ended up using most (and it was because of the hype over it really) was standard C and a sometimes C++ (in which case I didnt really do too much differently than C) I just never left it no matter how much I didnt like certain things because I already knew a good deal of code in C (still have some memorized) and learning a new language to solve problems I had in C would take twice as long because Id have to start from the beginning...
I dont even remember all the things I've used anymore... *sigh* I long to go back to the days when I was 11 and just getting into this stuff. but that was a good 5 years ago, and looking back, I wasted a lot of time in the wrong places, I couldve learned so much more -- in life and in programming -- if I had done things better... couldve learned more efficiently and been more social.
but time passed is time passed I guess...
Im thinking about taking a look at C# too. it looks interesting...
after awhile I found RapidQ, which was by far the most amazing BASIC language I've seen to this day. simpler and faster than VB and better compiled binaries... sadly that was a language that died.
before that I knew HTML/CSS, PHP, and some MySQL commands. Did a lot of web development, and made my own CMS for my site (no longer up). Did some hacks for a web forum script (acmlmboard) in my early days, my later works for that were never released because I stopped frequenting theior communities...
screwed around with TCL/TK which I thought were absolute gems. I loved them when I had my old slackware box. made simplified GUI scripts for applications like find, which I would use frequently if I had Xwindow problems and couldnt get any window managers running (when I used failsafe, which happened a lot lol) those languages are nice on windows too -- easiest GUI creation ever and good function, but not full-featured enough to do half the work of C++.
recently I learned a little bit of pascal, but I dropped it because I already knew more C++ (still not that much) but I may go back and learn it anyway -- the string capabilities make it more appealing than C/C++ to me for certain things...
but the language I ended up using most (and it was because of the hype over it really) was standard C and a sometimes C++ (in which case I didnt really do too much differently than C) I just never left it no matter how much I didnt like certain things because I already knew a good deal of code in C (still have some memorized) and learning a new language to solve problems I had in C would take twice as long because Id have to start from the beginning...
I dont even remember all the things I've used anymore... *sigh* I long to go back to the days when I was 11 and just getting into this stuff. but that was a good 5 years ago, and looking back, I wasted a lot of time in the wrong places, I couldve learned so much more -- in life and in programming -- if I had done things better... couldve learned more efficiently and been more social.
but time passed is time passed I guess...
Im thinking about taking a look at C# too. it looks interesting...
Last edited on
5 years!!!
Ya young'un. The way you were talking made me think you were ancient.
You should play with some functional languages. I like scheme. :-)
http://plt-scheme.org/
Of course, if you ever got into radical language modification with Tcl you may have played with some of its functional capabilities. :-)
You might like Python too. It is very nice and it has an exellent SDL package available.
http://www.pygame.org/news.html
Heh heh heh :->
Ya young'un. The way you were talking made me think you were ancient.
You should play with some functional languages. I like scheme. :-)
http://plt-scheme.org/
Of course, if you ever got into radical language modification with Tcl you may have played with some of its functional capabilities. :-)
You might like Python too. It is very nice and it has an exellent SDL package available.
http://www.pygame.org/news.html
Heh heh heh :->
closed account (2EwbqMoL)
haha yeah Im young, its just kinda scary for me these days. soon I wont be able to have lazy summers sitting around learning different programming languages and operating systems...
come this time next year, I have to find a college, a job, a real life.
but yeah I'll try those languages.
I already did screw around with python a bit, and I liked it a lot. I tried it as a replacement for C++ for an app I was coding to replace lines in a text file. it was ridiculously hard to get C++ to find individual lines in a text file and replace just that line... and I never ended up finishing the project in python either...
oh well, maybe I'll take up the project again some other time.
come this time next year, I have to find a college, a job, a real life.
but yeah I'll try those languages.
I already did screw around with python a bit, and I liked it a lot. I tried it as a replacement for C++ for an app I was coding to replace lines in a text file. it was ridiculously hard to get C++ to find individual lines in a text file and replace just that line... and I never ended up finishing the project in python either...
oh well, maybe I'll take up the project again some other time.
The trick is to take college courses that let you dink with computer programming. :-)
What? BASIC, C, HTML, SQL, Tcl/Tk and manual cracking in five years? Starting at eleven?!
Boy, do I feel stupid now. I started at the same time you did, when I was fifteen, and only know, with varying degrees of mastery, QuickBASIC, Fox, C++, Java, C#, and VB.NET. Note that with the exception of C++ and QuickBASIC, I only know about 25% of each of those languages.
Of course, having to carry a box with ten floppies to the Internet cafe greatly slowed down the process.
Now, about Pascal. Who needs it? You already know C, what else do you need? Strings? Please. C++ has strings and I don't even use them. C strings are smaller and at least twice as fast.
They didn't teach Pascal as an introductory language at my old school for nothing. It's antiquated. C++ alone can handle strings better than Pascal, having wchar_t. Unicode, brother. No more struggling with different encodings (Shift JIS was my undoing).
Boy, do I feel stupid now. I started at the same time you did, when I was fifteen, and only know, with varying degrees of mastery, QuickBASIC, Fox, C++, Java, C#, and VB.NET. Note that with the exception of C++ and QuickBASIC, I only know about 25% of each of those languages.
Of course, having to carry a box with ten floppies to the Internet cafe greatly slowed down the process.
Now, about Pascal. Who needs it? You already know C, what else do you need? Strings? Please. C++ has strings and I don't even use them. C strings are smaller and at least twice as fast.
They didn't teach Pascal as an introductory language at my old school for nothing. It's antiquated. C++ alone can handle strings better than Pascal, having wchar_t. Unicode, brother. No more struggling with different encodings (Shift JIS was my undoing).
Ah, let the language wars begin.
[rant]
All of Kernighan's original arguments are now obviated. A little research bears that out as obvious.
Further, it was Pascal, not C or BASIC, that put programming on the map for anyone who wasn't a grad student at Berkley or UCSD or working for the government. Turbo Pascal made PCs tick, and Apple Pascal made Macs tick.
But Unix was designed alongside C, and so began the wars.
I happen to like Pascal. It is a much cleaner language than C and by far friendlier to use.
If anyone wants to compare C++ to Pascal, he must concede that modern variants of Pascal must be used, just as C++ is a modern language -- otherwise it is just evangelical bigotry.
Care to provide proof of that?
(You won't be able to. Borland Pascal's strings are a language feature, and are far more functional, memory efficient, and easy to use than C++ strings. Oh, and they are automatically memory managed too. How about that? EP strings are managed via schemata --what you would call templates in C++-- though they aren't quite as cool as BP's or C++'s.)
Oh, and Pascal does Unicode just fine, thank you. (And did long before C or C++.)
Whenever I program anything big on Windows, especially GUI applications, I use Delphi. Why? Superior IDE integration; direct language support for Win32 (via extensions); powerful abstractions over the the GDI (better, even, than .NET IMHO), superior error correction and debugging facilities, both when compiling and when executing; fast compile times; robust, quick as lightening execution times; the most powerful dynamic package system I've seen; and nice, highly-optimized, itty-bitty executables. All out of the box. You've got to really work for it to get all those features out of any other language/compiler I know of.
Pascal does have its problems. Language standards are one of them. Despite the fact that Borland made Pascal go, and much of its OO structure was designed in consultation with Niklaus Wirth, the X3J9 committee seems to have had particularly hostile feelings toward Borland and have made some significant errors in the ISO standards --even when the scope and purpose of some language feature was identical to an existing feature in Borland's Pascal. That isn't to say that Borland hasn't made errors. In fact, some of CodeGear's more recent decisions I consider incomprehensible...
But in any case you can't beat up too hard on it considering the industry's current enlightenment. Certain things are done better the way Pascal always did it: managed pointers, strict data typing, structured file I/O, and modular programming.
C++, you'll note, still struggles with all of these, though fortunately the language standards have improved significantly in said respects with the ISO standards now being almost fully implemented in all the major compilers.
My wish list?
1. Delphi to add schemata and expand their powers to the same level as C++ templates.
2. Delphi to fix their stupid operator overloading to match the superior method used by PASCAL-XSC (woot! for them from me).
3. Delphi to implement the module 'import' and 'export' interfaces. (Modules, BTW, are an obvious rip-off of BP units.)
(Can you tell that I prefer Delphi?)
[/rant]
Shift JIS made a lot of people crazy. Especially people who had to use it in order to use their native language on the computer...
Well, that's my $0.02. :-O :-)
[rant]
All of Kernighan's original arguments are now obviated. A little research bears that out as obvious.
Further, it was Pascal, not C or BASIC, that put programming on the map for anyone who wasn't a grad student at Berkley or UCSD or working for the government. Turbo Pascal made PCs tick, and Apple Pascal made Macs tick.
But Unix was designed alongside C, and so began the wars.
I happen to like Pascal. It is a much cleaner language than C and by far friendlier to use.
If anyone wants to compare C++ to Pascal, he must concede that modern variants of Pascal must be used, just as C++ is a modern language -- otherwise it is just evangelical bigotry.
| Strings? Please. C++ has strings and I don't even use them. C strings are smaller and at least twice as fast. |
Care to provide proof of that?
(You won't be able to. Borland Pascal's strings are a language feature, and are far more functional, memory efficient, and easy to use than C++ strings. Oh, and they are automatically memory managed too. How about that? EP strings are managed via schemata --what you would call templates in C++-- though they aren't quite as cool as BP's or C++'s.)
Oh, and Pascal does Unicode just fine, thank you. (And did long before C or C++.)
Whenever I program anything big on Windows, especially GUI applications, I use Delphi. Why? Superior IDE integration; direct language support for Win32 (via extensions); powerful abstractions over the the GDI (better, even, than .NET IMHO), superior error correction and debugging facilities, both when compiling and when executing; fast compile times; robust, quick as lightening execution times; the most powerful dynamic package system I've seen; and nice, highly-optimized, itty-bitty executables. All out of the box. You've got to really work for it to get all those features out of any other language/compiler I know of.
Pascal does have its problems. Language standards are one of them. Despite the fact that Borland made Pascal go, and much of its OO structure was designed in consultation with Niklaus Wirth, the X3J9 committee seems to have had particularly hostile feelings toward Borland and have made some significant errors in the ISO standards --even when the scope and purpose of some language feature was identical to an existing feature in Borland's Pascal. That isn't to say that Borland hasn't made errors. In fact, some of CodeGear's more recent decisions I consider incomprehensible...
But in any case you can't beat up too hard on it considering the industry's current enlightenment. Certain things are done better the way Pascal always did it: managed pointers, strict data typing, structured file I/O, and modular programming.
C++, you'll note, still struggles with all of these, though fortunately the language standards have improved significantly in said respects with the ISO standards now being almost fully implemented in all the major compilers.
My wish list?
1. Delphi to add schemata and expand their powers to the same level as C++ templates.
2. Delphi to fix their stupid operator overloading to match the superior method used by PASCAL-XSC (woot! for them from me).
3. Delphi to implement the module 'import' and 'export' interfaces. (Modules, BTW, are an obvious rip-off of BP units.)
(Can you tell that I prefer Delphi?)
[/rant]
Shift JIS made a lot of people crazy. Especially people who had to use it in order to use their native language on the computer...
Well, that's my $0.02. :-O :-)
| Care to provide proof of that? |
I can't. It's an estimation based on the fact that C strings are nothing more than arrays, so you don't need any function to access the individual characters and there's no overhead from silly structures. strings.h is also smaller than string, although this only matters if you're using MinGW and need to make the program really small.
| (A lot of stuff about Delphi) |
Yes, but can it process the likeness of two bitmaps at a rate of 1.4 million comparisons per second (each comparison required comparing 16x16 HSV pixels), and then sort a 120+ MB array in less than thirty seconds?
And, more importantly, is it a Real programming language?
closed account (2EwbqMoL)
| What? BASIC, C, HTML, SQL, Tcl/Tk and manual cracking in five years? Starting at eleven?! Boy, do I feel stupid now. I started at the same time you did, when I was fifteen, and only know, with varying degrees of mastery, QuickBASIC, Fox, C++, Java, C#, and VB.NET. Note that with the exception of C++ and QuickBASIC, I only know about 25% of each of those languages. Of course, having to carry a box with ten floppies to the Internet cafe greatly slowed down the process. Now, about Pascal. Who needs it? You already know C, what else do you need? Strings? Please. C++ has strings and I don't even use them. C strings are smaller and at least twice as fast. They didn't teach Pascal as an introductory language at my old school for nothing. It's antiquated. C++ alone can handle strings better than Pascal, having wchar_t. Unicode, brother. No more struggling with different encodings (Shift JIS was my undoing). | |
I dont really have much of a degree of mastery of any of it. Guys like Duoas and even you probably could outcode me. I just do it because I have fun with it, whether I suck at it sometimes or not...
yeah at the time I didnt know much of any of it -- hell C/C++ still takes me for a ride a lot of times. The WinAPI is a pain, and i cant do much of anything without some sort of documentation in front of me. and I havent worked with the C++ string library a lot really -- most of the time I end up using regular C simply because I dont always require C++'s features... I've been trying to switch to using more C++ though, as there are some benefits to it.
on the scripting side of things (especially web development) I learned a lot very quickly... mostly I was able to learn so much because I didnt have any friends, and all I did was sit at home, on web forums on dialup. lol in those days my mom didnt want me talkin to people online, and I'd waste hours keeping the phone busy. Computers and videogames were all I had... so I sat and learned... got lots of memories screwing around with QBasic on an old crappy windows ME box.. guess part of what made them cool and mysterious was that I couldnt afford to have one when I was a lot younger -- my family has always been somewhat poor...
and thats where a lot of the regret comes in, hell I'm just starting to get a social life now. it was only very recently that I even kissed a girl for the first time (at 18) haha...
but this isnt a place to talk about my past... and please, dont argue over stupid language wars here.
I did find pascal a lot easier and more akin to basic (yet also more complex). I think it has its uses as what it was developed for -- a teaching tool. If I had played with it first, transitioning to C/C++ wouldve been much easier.
and as far as I've heard there are some modern incarnations of pascal -- although I do believe c/c++ is more powerful, sometimes a simpler, faster solution is needed and thats where languages like pascal, and even BASIC come in handy. there are some projects that are needlessly long in c/c++, and can be done quickly in another language. and in the day of fast processors and cheap memory, extensive optimization of code is no longer always necessary (in projects like calculators or text editors)...
but my personal gem is c/c++ -- I seem to keep coming back to it. but theres no point in arguing over stuff like this. Its like arguing over breakfast cerial -- the guy with the total is always going to say that his is the best because it has the most nutrients, but other people will chime in and say I LIKE SPECIAL K YOUR WRONG
so yeah.
Last edited on
@Duoas & Helios
I have to say I'm with Duoas on this one - Delphi has always (since V2 anyway) been head an shoulders above the 'competition' when it comes to building buisiness (GUI + DB) applications with a 'standard' windows GUI - the IDE and forms integration is so simple to use.
Is is a Real programming language - YES.
Can you do x,y,z in it - actually, you probably can if you realy want to, as Delphi allows you to put in-line assembly code, call DLL's from C++, etc. It might be a poor choice though, as writing it directly in C++ might be quicker and simpler.
There are a whole bunch of programming languages because they are targeted at different things - some have a wider scope than others, some have been superceeded, but there are still good reasons to use a range of languages for a range of tasks.
Going back many years, I recall the first Fortran practice lab at Uni - we did a 'Hello World' app. Took 15 mins to compile and build, and filled an entire floppy disk. Basic (just Basic, not VB) would do the job in seconds and take a fraction of the disk space - Did this mean Basic was better than Fortran? For this app, yes. For Fluid Dynamics calculations (it was an aeronautical enginnering degree) - No, basic would fall flat by comparison.
As with many things you need the right tool for the job, and a programming language is just the tool you use to program a computer.
C++ is a very fine tool, btw, but so is Delphi, you just use them for different tasks.
I have to say I'm with Duoas on this one - Delphi has always (since V2 anyway) been head an shoulders above the 'competition' when it comes to building buisiness (GUI + DB) applications with a 'standard' windows GUI - the IDE and forms integration is so simple to use.
Is is a Real programming language - YES.
Can you do x,y,z in it - actually, you probably can if you realy want to, as Delphi allows you to put in-line assembly code, call DLL's from C++, etc. It might be a poor choice though, as writing it directly in C++ might be quicker and simpler.
There are a whole bunch of programming languages because they are targeted at different things - some have a wider scope than others, some have been superceeded, but there are still good reasons to use a range of languages for a range of tasks.
Going back many years, I recall the first Fortran practice lab at Uni - we did a 'Hello World' app. Took 15 mins to compile and build, and filled an entire floppy disk. Basic (just Basic, not VB) would do the job in seconds and take a fraction of the disk space - Did this mean Basic was better than Fortran? For this app, yes. For Fluid Dynamics calculations (it was an aeronautical enginnering degree) - No, basic would fall flat by comparison.
As with many things you need the right tool for the job, and a programming language is just the tool you use to program a computer.
C++ is a very fine tool, btw, but so is Delphi, you just use them for different tasks.
Thank you, Faldrax, for understanding the point.
Different languages have different strengths and weaknesses. C++'s strength, head and shoulders above all the rest, is its multi-paradigm capacities and generic programming. This doesn't make it "better" or "worse-than" <your favorite/most-hated language> a propos. What makes it better or worse is its applicability to a given task.
But even beyond that, to quote from the C++FAQ-Lite 6.5
The reality is: you can accomplish the same task with either language relatively painlessly.
As to "is Pascal a real programming language"?
That depends on whether or not you consider the Mac OS, and thousands of applications written for Mac and PC, and powerful scientific software from Wuppertal, all in use for more than 35 years by big industries and governments and scientists all over the world, to be "real" or not.
And by the way, circular arguments don't impress me much.
Language wars are stupid --so don't go around beating up on languages you know next to nothing about. It ticks people off.
Different languages have different strengths and weaknesses. C++'s strength, head and shoulders above all the rest, is its multi-paradigm capacities and generic programming. This doesn't make it "better" or "worse-than" <your favorite/most-hated language> a propos. What makes it better or worse is its applicability to a given task.
But even beyond that, to quote from the C++FAQ-Lite 6.5
| In 99% of the cases, programming language selection is dominated by business considerations, not by technical considerations. Things that really end up mattering are things like availability of a programming environment for the development machine, availability of runtime environment(s) for the deployment machine(s), licensing/legal issues of the runtime and/or development environments, availability of trained developers, availability of consulting services, and corporate culture/politics. These business considerations generally play a much greater role than compile time performance, runtime performance, static vs. dynamic typing, static vs. dynamic binding, etc. Anyone who argues in favor of one language over another in a purely technical manner (i.e., who ignores the dominant business issues) exposes themself as a techie weenie, and deserves not to be heard. Business issues dominate technical issues, and anyone who doesn't realize that is destined to make decisions that have terrible business consequences — they are dangerous to their employer. |
The reality is: you can accomplish the same task with either language relatively painlessly.
As to "is Pascal a real programming language"?
That depends on whether or not you consider the Mac OS, and thousands of applications written for Mac and PC, and powerful scientific software from Wuppertal, all in use for more than 35 years by big industries and governments and scientists all over the world, to be "real" or not.
And by the way, circular arguments don't impress me much.
Language wars are stupid --so don't go around beating up on languages you know next to nothing about. It ticks people off.
I am really getting interested into looking into Delphi and/or Pascal.
I've always avoided Delphi, Pascal, Fortran, and Smalltalk, among others, mentally assigning them to the "Obsolete" category.. believing that C and C++ were built to supercede them, and be much better for all uses, as C# and the .NET technologies seem now to supercede C and C++...
Boy, am I wrong. Now, I may want to look back into each of these, for usability. Of course, the first thing that strikes me, as why I gave up on VB, is portability. VB requires me to ship or make available all of the runtime libraries with any application I make. C++ runs without runtime libraries. What about Delphi, or Pascal, or any of the above I mentioned?
I've always avoided Delphi, Pascal, Fortran, and Smalltalk, among others, mentally assigning them to the "Obsolete" category.. believing that C and C++ were built to supercede them, and be much better for all uses, as C# and the .NET technologies seem now to supercede C and C++...
Boy, am I wrong. Now, I may want to look back into each of these, for usability. Of course, the first thing that strikes me, as why I gave up on VB, is portability. VB requires me to ship or make available all of the runtime libraries with any application I make. C++ runs without runtime libraries. What about Delphi, or Pascal, or any of the above I mentioned?
Whoever wrote that deserves, after having his tongue surgically removed from his boss's asshole (it's not coming out any other way), to have his eardrums pierced and his head filled with any kind of carnivorous insect. Why? For reducing a most beautiful craft and art as programming to nothing more than a business tool. As if that was its sole application and anything else was child's play.
In any case, even the statement that "language selection is dominated by business considerations" is false. PHBs are nothing more than neophiles who will go for anything that's new. Partly because yes, there is a higher probability that a new language will have many programmers, ironically, because of the above neophilia, but also for the recent tendency of new languages to be increasingly easy to learn, shitty, and redundant. YES. Shitty and redundant. ALL OF THEM. It seems language designers can't think of anything new, lately, so they just keep designing C++ over and over again with added slowness and unnecessary features (what percentage of businesses using .NET actually needed binaries that would run on any god-damn platform there is? Well, the platform count can't be much higher than 2, anyway). But who cares, right? After all, that's what businesses want since, god forbid they'll take any sort of chances and go for something with less than four million billion programmers but that is actually suited for the job (just the other day, I thought my hairline receded another inch when I saw a wanted for functional language programmers).
My question was directed at Delphi. I wouldn't ask something I already know is not true. On this, I accept no argument, so you can stop typing right now, unknown future reader.
How do any of those things contributes to the Realness of a language? Real programming languages are those that would be used by the Real Programmers, those highest standards of quality all programmers more serious about programming than 3rd class programmers should aspire to.
PS: Yes. I purposely write without any line breaks to make my text harder to read. I also don't put spaces around operators and favor kilometric expressions.
In any case, even the statement that "language selection is dominated by business considerations" is false. PHBs are nothing more than neophiles who will go for anything that's new. Partly because yes, there is a higher probability that a new language will have many programmers, ironically, because of the above neophilia, but also for the recent tendency of new languages to be increasingly easy to learn, shitty, and redundant. YES. Shitty and redundant. ALL OF THEM. It seems language designers can't think of anything new, lately, so they just keep designing C++ over and over again with added slowness and unnecessary features (what percentage of businesses using .NET actually needed binaries that would run on any god-damn platform there is? Well, the platform count can't be much higher than 2, anyway). But who cares, right? After all, that's what businesses want since, god forbid they'll take any sort of chances and go for something with less than four million billion programmers but that is actually suited for the job (just the other day, I thought my hairline receded another inch when I saw a wanted for functional language programmers).
| As to "is Pascal a real programming language"? That depends on whether or not you consider the Mac OS, and thousands of applications written for Mac and PC, and powerful scientific software from Wuppertal, all in use for more than 35 years by big industries and governments and scientists all over the world, to be "real" or not. |
My question was directed at Delphi. I wouldn't ask something I already know is not true. On this, I accept no argument, so you can stop typing right now, unknown future reader.
How do any of those things contributes to the Realness of a language? Real programming languages are those that would be used by the Real Programmers, those highest standards of quality all programmers more serious about programming than 3rd class programmers should aspire to.
PS: Yes. I purposely write without any line breaks to make my text harder to read. I also don't put spaces around operators and favor kilometric expressions.
Last edited on
@helios
Wow, you really are a self-opinionated, contrary, arrogant snot, aren't you? You're going to have an awfully hard time when you make it out into the real world.
I can offer no further argument against rabid, foul-mouthed evangelism.
Alas.
@Aakanaar
Delphi is primarily targeted at Win32 platforms, but the FPC and Lazarus environment have done a fairly good job of making much of the language multi-platform. You can get Turbo Delphi Explorer 2006 for free. See
http://tx.codegear.com/downloads
You can (legally) install multiple identities (Delphi, C++, etc) using this
http://groups.google.com/group/borland.public.delphi.non-technical/browse_thread/thread/ebb2acda883daf68
FORTRAN exists everywhere that the GCC does and then some, but it really is ancient. Modern languages can do everything FORTRAN can (and more).
AFAIK, Smalltalk exists on a wide variety of platforms, but I've never used it so I don't know any more than that. You can always check out
http://www.smalltalk.org/main/
The more languages and programming paradigms you learn, the better programmer you become in every language and paradigm.
Hope this helps.
Wow, you really are a self-opinionated, contrary, arrogant snot, aren't you? You're going to have an awfully hard time when you make it out into the real world.
I can offer no further argument against rabid, foul-mouthed evangelism.
Alas.
@Aakanaar
Delphi is primarily targeted at Win32 platforms, but the FPC and Lazarus environment have done a fairly good job of making much of the language multi-platform. You can get Turbo Delphi Explorer 2006 for free. See
http://tx.codegear.com/downloads
You can (legally) install multiple identities (Delphi, C++, etc) using this
http://groups.google.com/group/borland.public.delphi.non-technical/browse_thread/thread/ebb2acda883daf68
FORTRAN exists everywhere that the GCC does and then some, but it really is ancient. Modern languages can do everything FORTRAN can (and more).
AFAIK, Smalltalk exists on a wide variety of platforms, but I've never used it so I don't know any more than that. You can always check out
http://www.smalltalk.org/main/
The more languages and programming paradigms you learn, the better programmer you become in every language and paradigm.
Hope this helps.
I reject your statement. I am neither opinionated nor snotty.
About the initial rant, I don't see anything evangelistic about it. Just my utter disagreement with an author expressed in a rather verbose way.
As for the second part, it was meant to clarify that I wasn't asking about Pascal and what I meant by "Real", since it seemed to not have been conveyed properly. My opinion about Pascal was so stated so as to not to start an argument over the Realness of Pascal.Which is nil.
Finally, you still haven't answered my question of whether Delphi is a Real programming language or not. Whether this was accidentally or conveniently forgotten is beyond my grasp.
About the initial rant, I don't see anything evangelistic about it. Just my utter disagreement with an author expressed in a rather verbose way.
As for the second part, it was meant to clarify that I wasn't asking about Pascal and what I meant by "Real", since it seemed to not have been conveyed properly. My opinion about Pascal was so stated so as to not to start an argument over the Realness of Pascal.
Finally, you still haven't answered my question of whether Delphi is a Real programming language or not. Whether this was accidentally or conveniently forgotten is beyond my grasp.
Last edited on
WOW quite the grouping of rants!!!
well, when I was in grade school, I was introduced to BASIC, couldn't tell you what variety, never did more than "Hello World".
In High School, I was fortunate enough to take a course on Turbo Pascal!
We had a lot of fun programming! My best friend and I sat next to each other and made quite a team writing programs. We ran well ahead of the rest of the class, and helped the teacher teach other students! :-)
About six years later, I began working for Bridgestone at a tire factory in Tennessee. all the automated equipment was ran by Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs) for most of the machine code, we used a proprietary "language" that used "ladder logic " (much like a ladder diagram for relays).
ladder logic is optimized for automated controls with real world inputs and outputs, but is very different, and limited compared to other languages.
now, I'm taking up C++ as a hobby, and am remembering how much I forgot about programming since High School!! (to say nothing about what I had not already learned!)
well, when I was in grade school, I was introduced to BASIC, couldn't tell you what variety, never did more than "Hello World".
In High School, I was fortunate enough to take a course on Turbo Pascal!
We had a lot of fun programming! My best friend and I sat next to each other and made quite a team writing programs. We ran well ahead of the rest of the class, and helped the teacher teach other students! :-)
About six years later, I began working for Bridgestone at a tire factory in Tennessee. all the automated equipment was ran by Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs) for most of the machine code, we used a proprietary "language" that used "ladder logic " (much like a ladder diagram for relays).
ladder logic is optimized for automated controls with real world inputs and outputs, but is very different, and limited compared to other languages.
now, I'm taking up C++ as a hobby, and am remembering how much I forgot about programming since High School!! (to say nothing about what I had not already learned!)
Heh, yeah. I had much the same experience. (In HS, not the tire factory part.) I don't think my teachers knew what to do with me.
But you make a good point: a lot of businesses use their own in-house language, which may or may not resemble anything mainstream.
I kind of liked True BASIC, which is what we used in school. For the time it had some very nice features (and still does).
Apparently, as you took the time to quote my entire answer to that very question in your previous post.
Please... just stop the attacks.
But you make a good point: a lot of businesses use their own in-house language, which may or may not resemble anything mainstream.
I kind of liked True BASIC, which is what we used in school. For the time it had some very nice features (and still does).
| ...is beyond my grasp. |
Apparently, as you took the time to quote my entire answer to that very question in your previous post.
Please... just stop the attacks.
| How would you know you old geezer? :-P Actually, dinking with HGC and (S)VGA hardware is a large part of what got me into programming. I learned Assembly just so I could make GWBASIC (and later, C and Pascal) do extra cool stuff with the graphics. I could probably still lay my hand on any piece of information about the thing in less than two seconds (and that includes standing up and getting the book of my shelf). If I even needed to. :-] |
Old? Mid 20s :P
Hmm, you are a few years younger than I thought. (I thought you were around 30.)
I really feel geezerly now (at 34).
:-|
I really feel geezerly now (at 34).
:-|