Favorite Programming Language?

Sharky Forums


View Poll Results: What is your favorite programming language?

Voters
39. You may not vote on this poll

  • C/C++

    22 56.41%

  • Java

    8 20.51%

  • Perl

    2 5.13%

  • Python

    3 7.69%

  • C#

    2 5.13%

  • Lisp

    2 5.13%
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 47

Thread: Favorite Programming Language?

  1. 02-21-2004, 11:27 AM #1
    starcomp
    starcomp is offline
    Goldfish
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    65

    Favorite Programming Language?

    What is your favorite programming language?

    Some have been grouped together, but I've tried to be fair to so many languages...

    My mistake, I had meant to add more languages, but accidentally hit Enter...


    Many of the listed languages are quite similar, but the point of my asking this poll wasn't to start a flame war, but more along the lines of personal preference for a language, not to debate strengths & weaknesses.
    Last edited by starcomp; 02-21-2004 at 11:33 AM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  2. 02-21-2004, 12:23 PM #2
    ua549
    ua549 is offline
    Great White Shark
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    21,595
    My three favorites are not listed -
    Assembler
    Algol
    Cobol
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  3. 02-21-2004, 07:37 PM #3
    BlueOval
    BlueOval is offline
    Mako Shark BlueOval's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    From HI/Live in AZ
    Posts
    3,400
    Neither was mine. Back when I was into coding, my fave was VisualBasic cause it was so easy and I could make games. lol
    1st Rig: DFI LP Ultra B | 2500+ Barton | 2x256 Corsair XMS PC3200 | 6800GT! | SP-97/120 Panaflo M1A | Antec 1000AMG/Fortron 530 | XPHome SP1

    2nd Rig: ABIT AN-7 | 2400+ mobile | 2x512 Geil Golden Dragon PC3500 | Ti4400 | SLK-900/92 Panaflo M1A | CM ATC-111/Antec 350 | 2kPro SP4

    3rd Rig: EPOX 8RDA+ | 2100+ Rev B | 2x256 HyperX PC3000 | Ti4400 | SLK-800/80 Panaflo H1A | Blizzard 360/Enermax 350 | 2kPro SP4

    My Heatware
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  4. 02-21-2004, 09:57 PM #4
    soupnazi
    soupnazi is offline
    Zoom-Zoom! soupnazi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    15,097
    Visual Basic!

    I'm learning Java and HATE it.
    Last edited by soupnazi; 02-21-2004 at 09:57 PM.
    Spoiler
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  6. 02-21-2004, 11:18 PM #5
    Terry
    Terry is offline
    Great White Shark Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    10,131
    C/C++ is really powerful.
    So it's my favourite.

    I don't know Assembly, so I can't comment on that.
    But I heard it's hard as hell.
    Member of TSGG & ITG
    HEATWARE

    Follow me down the rabbit hole:
    Spoiler
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  7. 02-22-2004, 02:43 PM #6
    rock
    rock is offline
    NullPointerException rock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    York, PA
    Posts
    6,203

    Talking

    As toss up between Java and C#. But .net has been annoying me lately, so Java gets the nod today. That'll show 'em.

    Open Source is free like a puppy is free.

    It's only when you look at an ant through a magnifying glass on a sunny day that you realise how often they burst into flames.

    Understanding Evolution
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  8. 02-22-2004, 05:22 PM #7
    christian_F
    christian_F is offline
    Goldfish christian_F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    57
    im going to have to give it to C++ its so versitile (sp?)
    My motto for computers : "When in doubt... Reformat" :P
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  9. 02-22-2004, 06:06 PM #8
    Handyman
    Handyman is offline
    Reef Shark
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    421
    I'm happy with C/C++, it's the one I currently understand the best

    Assembly is ok, but I wouldn't want to do anymore than basic hardware interfacing with it...
    Last edited by Handyman; 02-22-2004 at 06:06 PM.
    | Processor | Intel Pentium 4 @ 2800 MHz | Motherboard | ABIT IC7-Max3 | Memory | 2 GB Corsair XMS PC3200 DDR | Graphics | ATI Radeon 9800 Pro | OS/Prog HDD | W.D. Raptor 36GB (10k) SATA | Storage HDD | Seagate 160GB (7200) SATA | Burner | Lite-On 52x24x52 CDRW | DVD-ROM | Lite-On 16x DVD | Sound Card | Philips Acoustic Edge | Speakers | Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 | Flash Media | Lian-Li Flash Media Bay | Display | Dual NEC 22" Flat CRT | Case/PSU | Lian-Li PC-65B w/ Antec 430W | O.S. | MS Windows XP Pro | Printer | Epson Stylus Photo 2200
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  11. 02-23-2004, 12:38 AM #9
    DeathBunnyX
    DeathBunnyX is offline
    Catfish DeathBunnyX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Santa Ana, CA
    Posts
    152
    i'd have to go with c++.. mainly cuz that's all i know until i get outta school and have time to learn something else.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  12. 02-23-2004, 05:23 PM #10
    slavik
    slavik is offline
    Mako Shark slavik's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    3,308
    C, not C++

    because it was developed at the same time as UNIX ...
    C++ is like the industrial concrete block, you can build fast with it, but brick is better (C).

    assembly isn't easy, but you can make programs that are more optimized than if you did them in C.

    assembly code isn't exactly versatile between linux/windows (not just compilation), since you might sometimes have to take the CPU into account (I dunno how what I'm learning now will work on 64bit CPUs, since my code runs on a 32bit cpu) ...
    Activation? What activation?
    Quote Originally Posted by Geekkit (from ubuntu forums regarding 'goto' statement)
    Yep it sure does. So does crack cocaine. Existence is not a valid endorsement for being acceptable.
    Quote Originally Posted by Linus Torvalds
    Only wimps use tape backup: _real_ men just upload their important stuff on ftp, and let the rest of the world mirror it
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  13. 02-23-2004, 06:15 PM #11
    ua549
    ua549 is offline
    Great White Shark
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    21,595
    That's why I like Algol. It was the language used as a foundation for B and later C.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  14. 02-23-2004, 06:28 PM #12
    slavik
    slavik is offline
    Mako Shark slavik's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    3,308
    I was told that a C is just bunched up ASM ... and that C compiler, takes the C code, translates its to ASM, then gives it to an assembler ...

    is there anything between binary code (true binary instructions) and ASM?

    Originally posted by ua549
    That's why I like Algol. It was the language used as a foundation for B and later C.
    Activation? What activation?
    Quote Originally Posted by Geekkit (from ubuntu forums regarding 'goto' statement)
    Yep it sure does. So does crack cocaine. Existence is not a valid endorsement for being acceptable.
    Quote Originally Posted by Linus Torvalds
    Only wimps use tape backup: _real_ men just upload their important stuff on ftp, and let the rest of the world mirror it
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  15. 02-23-2004, 06:37 PM #13
    ua549
    ua549 is offline
    Great White Shark
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    21,595
    AFAIK there is absolutely no need to expand C statements into multiple Assembler instructions before generating code. In fact there are mainframe CPUs that do not have an assembly language, but do have an Algol compiler. Algol code is compiled directly into micro ops for execution. I mentioned Algol because I'm not sure if the 48 bit proc I'm thinking about, Unisys A Series has a C compiler.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  16. 02-23-2004, 06:46 PM #14
    slavik
    slavik is offline
    Mako Shark slavik's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    3,308
    AFAIK, C is translated into ASM and then given to assembler to do the rest ...

    wrong(AFAIK): C > machine code
    right(AFAIK): C > assembly > machine code

    Originally posted by ua549
    AFAIK there is absolutely no need to expand C statements into multiple Assembler instructions before generating code. In fact there are mainframe CPUs that do not have an assembly language, but do have an Algol compiler. Algol code is compiled directly into micro ops for execution. I mentioned Algol because I'm not sure if the 48 bit proc I'm thinking about, Unisys A Series has a C compiler.
    Activation? What activation?
    Quote Originally Posted by Geekkit (from ubuntu forums regarding 'goto' statement)
    Yep it sure does. So does crack cocaine. Existence is not a valid endorsement for being acceptable.
    Quote Originally Posted by Linus Torvalds
    Only wimps use tape backup: _real_ men just upload their important stuff on ftp, and let the rest of the world mirror it
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  17. 02-23-2004, 08:35 PM #15
    ua549
    ua549 is offline
    Great White Shark
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    21,595
    Originally posted by slavik
    AFAIK, C is translated into ASM and then given to assembler to do the rest ...

    wrong(AFAIK): C > machine code
    right(AFAIK): C > assembly > machine code
    Why do you think that is the way all C compilers work?
    C is an implementation of Algol and Algol does not work that way.
    If C generates assembly source code then it can be captured, modified and assembled later. That is not the case with the C compilers I am familiar with.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Forum Rules