That's a very noble attitude. But I still have my doubts.
That's a very noble attitude. But I still have my doubts.
Code:#include <cmath> #include <complex> bool euler_flip(bool value) { return std::pow ( std::complex<float>(std::exp(1.0)), std::complex<float>(0, 1) * std::complex<float>(std::atan(1.0) *(1 << (value + 2))) ).real() < 0; }
Java is in my opinion an inferior language, I believe therefor that the people who choose to make it their primary language will tend to be of inferior intellect.
Now read exactly what i said twice before knee jerk responding to it.
Programming in C/C++ isn't a simple task, not everyone is cut out to be a programmer.
For what? That statement is meaningless without context.
Or perhaps work in an industry/market where it is the predominant language. The Java market is booming right now, much more than C++. Cast aspersions on their intellect if you like, but I might second guess the assertion that a guy making six figures to develop back end web applications for a Fortune 50 company is "dumber" than a hardcore C++ game programmer working twice the hours but making half as much., I believe therefor that the people who choose to make it their primary language will tend to be of inferior intellect.
Last edited by medievalelks; 05-18-2009 at 07:08 AM.
This is some very flawed logic. It seems to me s/he could be dumber, and that that was the whole point of Java (to make it easier for stupid people*), which would certainly explain why it is booming (that and the applet). Getting paid a lot of money in any field has much more to do with circumstance AND GREED than it does intelligence. Being able to take advantage of, eg, your social status, just demonstrates that you should not be classified as "mentally handicapped", not that you are particularly brilliant. Let's say "smart for a pig". Otherwise, the leaders of those Fortune 500 companies must be smarter than sin, as opposed to people who perpetually leverage any (fair or unfair) advantage they can discern, regardless of the wider consequences a more intelligent person might discern. Perhaps they have done a smart job with the economy? Not.
Also, the idea that throwing a lot of money at something (eg by paying some half wit 6 figures) will make it better can quickly be disproven by surfing casually around a few large corporate (or government) web site. Some of them are a total mess on all fronts (functionality, cosmetics, coherence, etc) despite having a price tag in the millions. I don't play games, but I would say by and large game developers have done a much, much more admirable job in developing product during the last decade than "business oriented" web developers, who are just chowing at a trough (I won't blame someone for doing that, but that doesn't mean you merit pride in anything other than your check).
*I really have no idea or opinion about it, but that is the essential claim of Java proponents.
Last edited by MK27; 05-18-2009 at 09:16 AM.
C programming resources:
GNU C Function and Macro Index -- glibc reference manual
The C Book -- nice online learner guide
Current ISO draft standard
CCAN -- new CPAN like open source library repository
3 (different) GNU debugger tutorials: #1 -- #2 -- #3
cpwiki -- our wiki on sourceforge
I thought one baseless generalization deserved another.
And apparently you agree :-)Getting paid a lot of money in any field has much more to do with circumstance AND GREED than it does intelligence.
My whole point was that language ........ing contests are silly enough without the insulting of an entire base of programmers. I've worked with outstanding Java developers and I've worked with C++ hacks. I don't draw any conclusion from that other than that there are good and bad programmers in the world, and all kinds in between. Language has little to do with it.
Anyway, in my experience the smartest programmers are the ones who know how to use multiple tools well, and know when to use each.
Last edited by medievalelks; 05-18-2009 at 09:41 AM.
Java assumes the programmers don't know what they are doing, C/C++ assumes they do.
That is the reason they left out things like pointers, unsigned types (not sure about this one), operator overloading, goto, casting to smaller types ("if (a = 5)"), stack allocations... etc.
Perhaps more accurately, implicit conversion to types with a smaller range, since one can still type cast explicitly, or in your example, write "if ((a = 5) != 0)" (though either way it looks like a (potential) bug to me ).Originally Posted by cyberfish
Look up a C++ Reference and learn How To Ask Questions The Smart WayOriginally Posted by Bjarne Stroustrup (2000-10-14)
Java, being a RAD language, attracts sloppy people. Additionally, more "inquisitive" programmers will soon turn to more sophisticated languages.Has C++ just made us better programmers - more inquisitive, pushing our minds to the limits, always searching for better insight, while Java programmers brains turn to jell-o due to non-exposure to the 'low-level details'?
"Java is C++ without the guns, knives, and clubs."
-- James Gosling
Greets,
Philip
All things begin as source code.
Source code begins with an empty file.
-- Tao Te Chip
Yes Java sucks, but unfortunatly I find myself using it an awful lot. Uni requires it, and most of the jobs want it (so it pays to have a private project written in Java).
Things that I find (really) suck:
* No const
* while(0) is a compile error, whereas if(0) is not.
* Casts galore, i.e. with integer/short/long literals. I've seen a few bugs because of this with overloading.
* Generics suck
haha yeah I meant implicit conversion.Perhaps more accurately, implicit conversion to types with a smaller range, since one can still type cast explicitly, or in your example, write "if ((a = 5) != 0)" (though either way it looks like a (potential) bug to me ).
I think it should be up to the compilers to warn about this potential bug (as in C++), instead of not allowing it in the language.
I'm so used to C/C++ that
looks redundant to me .Code:if (a == 0)
I disagree.
Everyone is fit to be a programmer, some just more than others. No one can't learn that typingmakes a program execute, and that is programming...Code:int main() { }
Currently research OpenGL
> makes a program execute, and that is programming...
No, I beg to differ. You haven't "programmed the computer" to do anything.
hmm... both if (0) and while (0) sounded suspicious to me, especially after cyberfish raised the issue of Java not allow implicit conversion from int to boolean (among other implicit conversions). A quick check shows that if (0) is not allowed precisely because of the required conversion of int to boolean. while (false) resulted in a compile error due to the code being obviously unreachable.
Perhaps such a decision to make it an error rather than a warning is justified, if indeed static analysis can prove rather than merely suggest that the code is unreachable. (Then again, Snafuist pointed out recently that unreachable code is a valid obfuscation technique.)
Look up a C++ Reference and learn How To Ask Questions The Smart WayOriginally Posted by Bjarne Stroustrup (2000-10-14)
There are so many stupid comments in this thread that it makes my head hurt. This C++ elitism doesn't impress anybody, and only does a disservice to yourself.
We do that all the time on this board. That response usually comes after a question that doesn't make sense within the bounds of the language. Something like, "In C++, how do I call my destructor function?".even the veterans there are apt to respond with things like "why would you want to do such a thing?"