BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Please compose all posts in Emacs.

Moderators: phlip, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Berengal
Superabacus Mystic of the First Rank
Posts: 2707
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 5:51 am UTC
Location: Bergen, Norway
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby Berengal » Thu Apr 23, 2009 12:46 pm UTC

Is there an OS written in BASIC? Any BASIC?
It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students who are motivated by money: As potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.

User avatar
SJ Zero
Posts: 740
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:10 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby SJ Zero » Thu Apr 23, 2009 12:49 pm UTC

Is there an illiterate echo in here?

User avatar
Berengal
Superabacus Mystic of the First Rank
Posts: 2707
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 5:51 am UTC
Location: Bergen, Norway
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby Berengal » Thu Apr 23, 2009 12:52 pm UTC

I just googled it and couldn't find any references to any.
It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students who are motivated by money: As potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.

User avatar
SJ Zero
Posts: 740
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:10 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby SJ Zero » Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:00 pm UTC

Fine, if you want to keep on your Red Herrings, how many OSes have you programmed this year?

User avatar
Berengal
Superabacus Mystic of the First Rank
Posts: 2707
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 5:51 am UTC
Location: Bergen, Norway
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby Berengal » Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:06 pm UTC

One.

Not from scratch obviously, I just played around a bit with House.

Anyway, I was just curious.
It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students who are motivated by money: As potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.

User avatar
SJ Zero
Posts: 740
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:10 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby SJ Zero » Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:15 pm UTC

Nope, no web sites written in C either.

User avatar
Berengal
Superabacus Mystic of the First Rank
Posts: 2707
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 5:51 am UTC
Location: Bergen, Norway
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby Berengal » Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:24 pm UTC

I wouldn't be too sure about that, I distinctly remember something about websites in C on tdwtf.

Anyway, there was even an effort to write an OS in python once. It failed miserably, and only secondary references are left, but still, someone tried...

However, since we're on the topic of domains anyway, which domains do you consider both C and BASIC to cover?
It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students who are motivated by money: As potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.

User avatar
SJ Zero
Posts: 740
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:10 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby SJ Zero » Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:42 pm UTC

I'm focusing more on application development on a non-trivial platform. Windows, for example, contains thousands of interfaces, which are piled on top of other interfaces, which are piled on top of OTHER interfaces. Dealing with minute details in such an environment is stupid, since the underlying platform is so ridiculously complicated you get no benefit from working with the details at the one (AND EXACTLY ONE) layer you have at your disposal.

Now, this CAN mean trivial applications, and in my case, often does. Setting up a compiler environment and a bunch of includes is a waste of time when all I need is five lines to read a file, make a decision, and spit out an output into another file. In larger applications, I think everyone here has had to deal with the misplaced pointer or other side-effect of dealing with way too much detail. Ever write a program in C and have it run, only to have it fail on someone else's computer? Sure, there's a problem in there, and sure, it's your fault, but if you didn't have to deal with so much useless detail, you wouldn't have missed one of said details.

That's why Java is such a juggernaught. More talk is done of Java than of C and C++ combined. There are more Java jobs than for C and C++ combined. The reason is, it manages to deal with a lot of the details that you really don't need to care about. Before Java, Visual Basic was huge(Half the downloads on the Internet would refuse to run if you didn't download one VB runtime or another), but Microsoft was more interested in pushing C#, and VB has relinquished market share to the obviously superior platform (in the sense that Java runs on multiple platforms, integrates seamlessly into the Internet, and only requires one download to work -- Java is a universe better than C, but keep some of the silly conventions of the language, such as requiring a semicolon at the end of every command, even though single line commands are used more often than multi-line commands).

Obviously, I think the basic concept of BASIC is better than the other languages for most programming, which isn't a multi-year contract worked on by a team of 200, but a little program to do a very specific task, coded by one guy in an afternoon.

0xBADFEED
Posts: 687
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 2:14 am UTC

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby 0xBADFEED » Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:08 pm UTC

The whole point I think that most people are making is that BASIC doesn't add anything to the pantheon of programming languages.

It doesn't have the low-level capability that C does. It doesn't have the high-level capabilities or portability of a Java or C# or Python. It isn't as quick to write as Perl. It doesn't have the elegance of the functional languages.

You can't seriously believe that BASIC is better than C for low-level programming or performance critical programming. But if you want to make a comparison between BASIC and C that's where they have to compete because that's C's niche. That's why people use C. It's pointless to talk about any other dimension of C because those have all been superseded by other languages.

What is it that Basic does better than any other language, and thus makes it worth using?

For languages to survive they have to fill a niche. What niche does BASIC fill?

(I mean for real software developers. The "Oh me yarm, I JUST LEARNED HOW TO CODE" language does not count as a niche.)

User avatar
ash.gti
Posts: 404
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:18 am UTC
Location: Probably a coffee shop.

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby ash.gti » Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:11 pm UTC

SJ Zero wrote:I'm focusing more on application development on a non-trivial platform. Windows, for example, contains thousands of interfaces, which are piled on top of other interfaces, which are piled on top of OTHER interfaces. Dealing with minute details in such an environment is stupid, since the underlying platform is so ridiculously complicated you get no benefit from working with the details at the one (AND EXACTLY ONE) layer you have at your disposal.

Now, this CAN mean trivial applications, and in my case, often does. Setting up a compiler environment and a bunch of includes is a waste of time when all I need is five lines to read a file, make a decision, and spit out an output into another file. In larger applications, I think everyone here has had to deal with the misplaced pointer or other side-effect of dealing with way too much detail. Ever write a program in C and have it run, only to have it fail on someone else's computer? Sure, there's a problem in there, and sure, it's your fault, but if you didn't have to deal with so much useless detail, you wouldn't have missed one of said details.

That's why Java is such a juggernaught. More talk is done of Java than of C and C++ combined. There are more Java jobs than for C and C++ combined. The reason is, it manages to deal with a lot of the details that you really don't need to care about. Before Java, Visual Basic was huge(Half the downloads on the Internet would refuse to run if you didn't download one VB runtime or another), but Microsoft was more interested in pushing C#, and VB has relinquished market share to the obviously superior platform (in the sense that Java runs on multiple platforms, integrates seamlessly into the Internet, and only requires one download to work -- Java is a universe better than C, but keep some of the silly conventions of the language, such as requiring a semicolon at the end of every command, even though single line commands are used more often than multi-line commands).

Obviously, I think the basic concept of BASIC is better than the other languages for most programming, which isn't a multi-year contract worked on by a team of 200, but a little program to do a very specific task, coded by one guy in an afternoon.


This thread should of been named BASIC vs. (python, lisp, ruby, javascript, perl, bash, php, haskell, groovy, C#, java; pick one)

If this is the context in which BASIC is 'better' than C then your not even giving them a fair playing field to start with.

SJ Zero wrote: Ever write a program in C and have it run, only to have it fail on someone else's computer? Sure, there's a problem in there, and sure, it's your fault, but if you didn't have to deal with so much useless detail, you wouldn't have missed one of said details.


These are the details that make C faster than other languages and in most cases where speed is important people still use C.

Heck, even in ruby or python or many others you can drop down to C to optimize something if you don't need all the fluff their runtimes offer.

But more to the point, I'd submit ruby is vastly superior to BASIC because its more verbose, offers easy ways to optimize itself, has a built in package system that is easy and useful, has a well defined and well documented std library, is cross platform and still lets you link it a number of other 3rd party libraries for support for things like OpenGL if you want.

We are still comparing apples to oranges to grapes but I guess thats not that important anymore.
# drinks WAY to much espresso

User avatar
SJ Zero
Posts: 740
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:10 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby SJ Zero » Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:19 pm UTC

Ah, but this is a religious war, not a practical discussion. I've already mentioned this.

Is my writing really so incomprehensible? This is getting tiresome, an entire page of people making arguments I've already covered -- in some cases, directly making the exact same argument.

0xBADFEED
Posts: 687
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 2:14 am UTC

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby 0xBADFEED » Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 pm UTC

SJ Zero wrote:Ah, but this is a religious war

Even so that doesn't mean you can just brush completely cogent and valid criticisms of your position under the carpet and continue to "WHARRRGARBL BASIC IS BETTER THAN C".
If you take an unpopular position, be prepared to defend it with something more than stubbornness and repetition.

User avatar
headprogrammingczar
Posts: 3072
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Beaming you up

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby headprogrammingczar » Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:49 pm UTC

SJ Zero wrote:Ah, but this is a religious war, not a practical discussion.

In that case, in true religious war fashion:
Spoiler:
Oh me yarm U SO STUPID LURN 2 B STUPID WRITE STUPPID!!111!!!!1!1ELEVEN!
<quintopia> You're not crazy. you're the goddamn headprogrammingspock!
<Weeks> You're the goddamn headprogrammingspock!
<Cheese> I love you

User avatar
SJ Zero
Posts: 740
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:10 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby SJ Zero » Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:58 pm UTC

0xBADFEED wrote:
SJ Zero wrote:Ah, but this is a religious war

Even so that doesn't mean you can just brush completely cogent and valid criticisms of your position under the carpet and continue to "WHARRRGARBL BASIC IS BETTER THAN C".
If you take an unpopular position, be prepared to defend it with something more than stubbornness and repetition.


So far, it doesn't matter WHAT I write, because I'll have people ignoring it anyway. How many times did I have to reiterate that I think C is good for hardware programming(something I covered in my first post)? How many times did I have to reiterate that I knew C(something I covered in my first post)? How many times now have I had to reiterate that I agree a C vs. BASIC discussion is a religious war sort of question, since there are many other languages that equally deal with the negatives of C I've pointed out? I could give the best argument in history, and it wouldn't matter, because none of you would read it, and I'd end up going "for the seventh time, yes C is good for hardware, but very little programming addresses pure hardware environments today".

Besides, when did "I like ruby lol" become a valid criticism?

User avatar
netcrusher88
Posts: 2166
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:35 pm UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby netcrusher88 » Thu Apr 23, 2009 4:12 pm UTC

Point: it's as valid as ¡This C is burning me!
Sexothermic
I have only ever made one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it. -Voltaire
They said we would never have a black president until Swine Flu. -Gears

User avatar
SJ Zero
Posts: 740
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:10 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby SJ Zero » Thu Apr 23, 2009 4:18 pm UTC

Except I give actual arguments, a wide variety of them. I've covered everything from the syntax to the platform to the documentation.

User avatar
ash.gti
Posts: 404
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:18 am UTC
Location: Probably a coffee shop.

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby ash.gti » Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:39 pm UTC

This is purely opinion anyway, is there really any need to go on?

*Edit*
here look, there is already a thread that you can write in as much as you want about why you enjoy basic: Why do you prefer [n] programming language?

I don't really see this 'debate/argument' going anywhere productive, since we are basing all of our 'facts' off opinions.
# drinks WAY to much espresso

User avatar
SJ Zero
Posts: 740
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:10 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby SJ Zero » Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:01 pm UTC

Religion isn't useful.

Besides, I'm working with a particular frame here. Partially because historically, this discussion was a big religious war in many circles.

dean.menezes
Posts: 135
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 3:47 am UTC

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby dean.menezes » Thu Apr 23, 2009 11:14 pm UTC

Even the FreeBASIC BASIC compiler only runs on Windows and x86 Linux. It does not run on x86-64 Linux, let alone ARM, MIPS, etc.

User avatar
Amnesiasoft
Posts: 2573
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 4:28 am UTC
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby Amnesiasoft » Fri Apr 24, 2009 4:11 am UTC

Fine. Since you won't listen to reason Mr. Zero.

C
Image

BASIC
ImageImage

There is no contest here.

fazzone
Posts: 186
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 9:38 pm UTC
Location: A boat

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby fazzone » Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:31 am UTC

Beard > no beard
*/

User avatar
headprogrammingczar
Posts: 3072
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Beaming you up

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby headprogrammingczar » Fri Apr 24, 2009 1:00 pm UTC

And SecondTalon is god.
<quintopia> You're not crazy. you're the goddamn headprogrammingspock!
<Weeks> You're the goddamn headprogrammingspock!
<Cheese> I love you

Comic JK
Posts: 270
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 6:08 pm UTC

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby Comic JK » Fri Apr 24, 2009 7:57 pm UTC

fazzone wrote:Beard > no beard

It's quite possible that they grew beards while programming large C projects--that can take a long, long time. But then what you want is C++, not BASIC. And for little things, why use BASIC when you have Python et al? BASIC is dead and gone, superseded, and its purpose long extinct.
Image
A webcomic funnier than life itself. Updated Monday-Friday.

User avatar
OOPMan
Posts: 314
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 10:20 am UTC
Location: Cape Town, South Africa

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby OOPMan » Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:41 am UTC

Comic JK wrote:
fazzone wrote:Beard > no beard

It's quite possible that they grew beards while programming large C projects--that can take a long, long time. But then what you want is C++, not BASIC. And for little things, why use BASIC when you have Python et al? BASIC is dead and gone, superseded, and its purpose long extinct.


A succint summation of where everyone other than SJZero knows to be the case :-)
Image

Image

User avatar
SJ Zero
Posts: 740
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:10 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby SJ Zero » Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:59 pm UTC

The beautiful thing about such trolling is, it really doesn't matter what you think.

End of the day, I've got a great tool I use to make my work a lot easier. With the languages you're suggesting, all I'd have is a bunch more binders on my wall for searching for the obscure third party semi-standard command(don't use that command though, use this command! That one you looked up is depreciated!) and a clusterfuck every time I wanted to make what in BASIC is a 15-line program.(I can access the COM ports in FB on either platform with knowledge from the '80s. How do you access a COM port in most languages today? Get ready to download something!)

0xBADFEED
Posts: 687
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 2:14 am UTC

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby 0xBADFEED » Wed Apr 29, 2009 3:46 pm UTC

SJ Zero wrote:I can access the COM ports in FB on either platform with knowledge from the '80s. How do you access a COM port in most languages today?

Who has COM ports anymore?

User avatar
SJ Zero
Posts: 740
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:10 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby SJ Zero » Wed Apr 29, 2009 3:47 pm UTC

Enough industrial equipment that you can't just drop them and pretend they don't exist to make the discussion easier.

0xBADFEED
Posts: 687
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 2:14 am UTC

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby 0xBADFEED » Wed Apr 29, 2009 4:31 pm UTC

SJ Zero wrote:Enough industrial equipment that you can't just drop them and pretend they don't exist to make the discussion easier.

I am aware. I was joking... mostly.

User avatar
phlip
Restorer of Worlds
Posts: 7565
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:56 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby phlip » Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:09 am UTC

Code: Select all

#if defined WIN32 // technically it should go in here for DOS and WIN16 too, but I don't know what the usual pre-defined ids are.
#  define SERIAL1 "COM1:"
#elseif defined linux
#  define SERIAL1 "/dev/ttyS0"
#elseif defined BSD
#  define SERIAL1 "/dev/cua00"
// and so on for any other platforms you care about
#else
#  error Please add the serial port name for your system here.
#endif

FILE *serial_port = fopen(SERIAL1, "rb+");

Same sort of thing works in almost every other language... serial ports are handled at the OS level even in an OS as cut-down as DOS... so it doesn't matter what language you're using, as long as you can open a (virtual) file.

Code: Select all

enum ಠ_ಠ {°□°╰=1, °Д°╰, ಠ益ಠ╰};
void ┻━┻︵​╰(ಠ_ಠ ⚠) {exit((int)⚠);}
[he/him/his]

User avatar
netcrusher88
Posts: 2166
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:35 pm UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby netcrusher88 » Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:40 am UTC

So philip with the C answer... and for python, it's the same basic thing or you could use the excellent pyserial library. Which is, again, optional.

Code: Select all

f = open("/dev/ttyS0")
works just as well. open("com1") on Windows is somewhat more finicky (looks like, according to the Internet) because Windows makes opening a serial port significantly more complicated, but it does in general work. I think.

And because this is Religious Wars: this is because the UNIX way of doing things (everything a file) is vastly superior. Though when taken to its logical extreme as in plan9, it's a little bit odd. Personally I like the fact that sockets aren't files...
Sexothermic
I have only ever made one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it. -Voltaire
They said we would never have a black president until Swine Flu. -Gears

User avatar
hotaru
Posts: 1044
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 6:54 pm UTC

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby hotaru » Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:27 am UTC

netcrusher88 wrote:Though when taken to its logical extreme as in plan9, it's a little bit odd. Personally I like the fact that sockets aren't files...

though you have to admit, this is pretty cool:
wikipedia wrote:You can implement a NAT by mounting a /net from a perimeter machine with a public IP, while connecting to it from an internal network of private IP addresses, using the Plan 9 protocol 9P in the internal network. Or you can implement a VPN by mounting a /net directory from a remote gateway, using secured 9P over the public Internet.

Code: Select all

factorial product enumFromTo 1
isPrime n 
factorial (1) `mod== 1

User avatar
OOPMan
Posts: 314
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 10:20 am UTC
Location: Cape Town, South Africa

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby OOPMan » Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:19 am UTC

SJ Zero wrote:With the languages you're suggesting, all I'd have is a bunch more binders on my wall for searching for the obscure third party semi-standard command(don't use that command though, use this command! That one you looked up is depreciated!) and a clusterfuck every time I wanted to make what in BASIC is a 15-line program.(I can access the COM ports in FB on either platform with knowledge from the '80s. How do you access a COM port in most languages today? Get ready to download something!)


Well, the replies to that comment have revealed that once again you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

Let's reiterate it really simply for you one more time:

For any set of problems for which BASIC is a better choice than C, Python/Ruby/LISP/Haskell/etc/etc/etc are better choices for the given problem set than BASIC.

By clinging to BASIC you're essentially crippling yourself when it comes to solving the set of problems you claim BASIC is better for than C. It's almost funny, except it's not really.
Image

Image

User avatar
SJ Zero
Posts: 740
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:10 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby SJ Zero » Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:18 pm UTC

See, the difference between us is, I've given reasons for my preference. You've just said "lol mine is bettar".

I hope you're a better programmer than a rhetorician.

User avatar
phlip
Restorer of Worlds
Posts: 7565
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:56 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby phlip » Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:29 pm UTC

No, the difference is that we've read the reasons for your preference, and disagree. You haven't even done that. You don't get to ignore our arguments and then claim we haven't made them.

Code: Select all

enum ಠ_ಠ {°□°╰=1, °Д°╰, ಠ益ಠ╰};
void ┻━┻︵​╰(ಠ_ಠ ⚠) {exit((int)⚠);}
[he/him/his]

User avatar
SJ Zero
Posts: 740
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:10 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby SJ Zero » Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:31 pm UTC

That's a crock of shit and you know it. How many times did I have to repeat myself over the course of this discussion when someone who allegedly "read the reasons for your preference" decided to post about something I've already said? I can tell you right now: a lot.

By the way, where in this discussion do people bother to mention any actual points about their language? I feel like I'm in a room filled with politicians. I'm doomed to lose this argument because I've got one, where it's much easier to pretend the superiority of other languages is axiomatic than to actually put forward legitimate arguments.

That said, it's still a "Basic vs. C" thread, since there's a "hay gais I love this language!!!!111" thread.

User avatar
OOPMan
Posts: 314
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 10:20 am UTC
Location: Cape Town, South Africa

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby OOPMan » Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:21 pm UTC

Reasons why I think BASIC < Python/Ruby/LISP/Haskell/etc/etc?

Two words:

Functional Progamming

I rest my case.

Unless you illustrate that your BASIC dialect of choice supports functional programming, in which
case I might be willing to admit that I was a bit hasty in concluding you to be insane ;-)
Image

Image

User avatar
headprogrammingczar
Posts: 3072
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Beaming you up

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby headprogrammingczar » Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:22 pm UTC

Hey, while we are at it, why don't we make a "Quicksort vs. Bubblesort" thread? Bubblesort wins, obviously...
<quintopia> You're not crazy. you're the goddamn headprogrammingspock!
<Weeks> You're the goddamn headprogrammingspock!
<Cheese> I love you

User avatar
SJ Zero
Posts: 740
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:10 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby SJ Zero » Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:46 pm UTC

OOPMan wrote:Reasons why I think BASIC < Python/Ruby/LISP/Haskell/etc/etc?

Two words:

Functional Progamming

I rest my case.

Unless you illustrate that your BASIC dialect of choice supports functional programming, in which
case I might be willing to admit that I was a bit hasty in concluding you to be insane ;-)


You're doing a horrible job of making your case. You're not bothering to tell me why I should give a crap. You're just telling me that your pet feature isn't in there so it's obviously inferior.

Bubble sort wins if you can get a visualization going on. Neato bubbles! :D-/-<

User avatar
OOPMan
Posts: 314
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 10:20 am UTC
Location: Cape Town, South Africa

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby OOPMan » Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:20 pm UTC

*sigh*

It looks like Djikstra really was right. BASIC does, somehow or other, cause brain damage.

Still, it is interesting to see in action...

Hint: Functional Progamming is not a Pet Feature, it's an important Mental Paradigm that WILL help you become a better programmer if you can fully grasp it...

;-)
Image

Image

User avatar
SJ Zero
Posts: 740
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:10 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: BASIC vs. C (BASIC wins, obviously)

Postby SJ Zero » Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:34 pm UTC

Basic is to C, as regular programming is to brand new paradigm of thinking about programming.

That's fine in the pure programming world, but for most people, programming is a means to an end, not an end by itself.

Maybe that's the issue here. Everyone is so used to the incestuous philosophy of programming for programming's sake, people have forgotten that you can program to solve problems too. C makes sense in this philosophy, because it only makes sense to just go ahead and learn something too complicated for the job at hand so you learn a programming mindset. Learning a completely new philosophy of programming makes sense in this philosophy, again because programming is important enough in this philosophy to learn a new tool for a job you could already do to improve your programming mindset.

I'm not a programmer, though. I'm an engineer, so when I have a problem to solve, the less time I spend thinking about implementing my solution, the more time I spend finding a solution.


Return to “Religious Wars”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests