 |
|
|
Mycroft Holmes wrote: with a minimum of agility you get to watch them boil out and do ... nothing.
You sir, are a wordsmith... and owe me a new keyboard... rofl...
|
| Sign In·View Thread·PermaLink | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
That could have been a funny observation, but you've really got to work on your delivery.
Bitter, nasty, and spiteful rarely make people laugh.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
| Sign In·View Thread·PermaLink | 5.00/5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
No, she got an award because she earned it. Your jealousy shines through.
--
Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
|
| Sign In·View Thread·PermaLink | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Good on her. When working in Europe there seemed to be heaps of female programmers, mainly from the old Soviet countries. We have three where I work now in Sydney.
|
| Sign In·View Thread·PermaLink | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reads like he's bathing in chicks now.
Personally, I love the idea that Raymond spends his nights posting bad regexs to mailing lists under the pseudonym of Jane Smith. He'd be like a super hero, only more nerdy and less useful. [Trevel]
| FoldWithUs! | sighist | µLaunch - program launcher for server core and hyper-v server
|
| Sign In·View Thread·PermaLink | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting...
This will kill me:
if (a < b) f(); // INVALID
for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {} // INVALID
Invalid!! But I've been typing it that way for 20 years! Grrrrr....
Plus the use of the pascal like :=
Still interesting though.
- S
50 cups of coffee and you know it's on!
Code, follow, or get out of the way.
|
| Sign In·View Thread·PermaLink | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Echols wrote: Plus the use of the pascal like :=
That part I like. In fact, I wish they departed from C syntax even more...
|
| Sign In·View Thread·PermaLink | 3.50/5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and +:= or is it :+=??
Luc Pattyn
I only read code that is properly indented, and rendered in a non-proportional font; hint: use PRE tags in forum messages
|
| Sign In·View Thread·PermaLink | 5.00/5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: I wish they departed from C syntax even more...
There's a tendency to make most new languages use C or C-like syntax. I think they're frightened of alienating the C-syntax fanatics. 
In the 21st century we ought to be moving on from C syntax IMO.
Kevin
|
| Sign In·View Thread·PermaLink | 5.00/5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not frightened; it's a practical matter. The feeling is that there is so much C code (and coders) out there that making people rewrite it is a bad idea. So if the new language can use existing C code pretty much as it is, then the language has a better chance of acceptance.
As I recall the D website used to say that a piece of C code passed through the D compiler should either compile and work as it did under C or fail. I don't see that notation anymore.
At any rate, the D website does say:
"Have a short learning curve for programmers comfortable with programming in C or C++."
I know I had a tough time changing from Pascal to C, I don't want to have to go through that again, especially if the new language is more verbose.
|
| Sign In·View Thread·PermaLink | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: The feeling is that there is so much C code (and coders) out there that making people rewrite it is a bad idea
How is creating a new language with different syntax rewriting C code? Why can't it just map to C code if that is a requirement?
I accept that providing a familiar syntax makes the language initially more appealing and therefore from a practical point of view that's why they do it. But in an ideal world we should be able to focus on the concepts and move to more readable syntaxes. Having said that I do consider C# and Java to be advances over C/C++ in readability. And I don't consider this to be that big an issue.
PIEBALDconsult wrote: especially if the new language is more verbose
There's a difference between verbose and readable. I consider VB .NET to be verbose. I consider a language such as Eiffel to be readable, a bit terser than Pascal or Ada. Eiffel looks verbose superficially but that is an illusion. It's actually more concise than C++, C# or Java in certain contexts because it's more declarative.
Kevin
|
| Sign In·View Thread·PermaLink | 5.00/5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
I mean if you have working code (perhaps library code), you may not want to port it to a new language if it would not be easy.
Likewise, you don't want to have to retrain or replace your staff.
Ergo, having a new language that is very similar to a widely used language just makes good sense.
|
| Sign In·View Thread·PermaLink | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Echols wrote: Plus the use of the pascal like :=
Not exactly. As far as I understood, the := operator in Go is a declaration of a new variable + initialization, not only association.
Pascal:A:= B <=> A = B;
Go:A:= B <=> int A = B; (where int is an implied type of B)
Greetings - Jacek
|
| Sign In·View Thread·PermaLink | 5.00/5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Echols wrote: Plus the use of the pascal like :=
As if the 'var' keyword in javascript and actionscript wasn't bad enough.
I still wonder why they called it 'java'-script.
|
| Sign In·View Thread·PermaLink | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert Surtees wrote: Time to dump .Net. Party is over
Go is hardly competing with .NET It claims to be a low-level system language (although this GC makes me wonder...)
|
| Sign In·View Thread·PermaLink | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is a plethora of newer, safer, easier to ease low level language.
I particularly like D[^].
I even think they have some native compiler of a variant of C#.
Anyway, sadly, none seems to take off or have good commercial and wide library support....
Hopefully Go will go further!
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
_________________________________________________________
My programs never have bugs, they just develop random features.
modified on Tuesday, November 10, 2009 7:56 PM
|
| Sign In·View Thread·PermaLink | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== 
) 
:= 
;