 |
Cheat Engine
The Official Site of Cheat Engine
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
appalsap
Moderator
 Reputation: 0
Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 6753
Location: Pakistan
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 9:14 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| lXciD wrote: | | I can only say, if C can do it, so can C++... |
Nope
| lXciD wrote: | | Why bother with all these language which is better thing... Get pass this as fast as possible and start programming... All programming are all the same in their fundamental form... |
Wrong
| lXciD wrote: | Be it assembly, C++, C#, VB.NET, Java, etc... There are all use to develop software... Its the user that matters, not the tool...
|
But if the product is hindered by the language (see: virtual machines) you have a problem.
| lXciD wrote: | | I agree you need to decide which language to learn because some language have their restriction. Like Java totally took control of the memory management portion and you wouldn't be able to develop very in depth window application with Java. You can't develop VB.NET or C# in linux... But you shouldn't be bother about which is better and more powerful... If you are given the power of the world, but you don't know how to use them... Its equal to you doesn't have that power... |
You can do .NET (see: mono) in linux, it just sucks.
| lXciD wrote: | Object Oriented Programming is a concept, not programming language. In the most basic form, They are just putting a hidden 'this' in front of the function parameter. If you program in C you will be doing almost exactly the same... Create structure, pass them to one function... pass them to the other function... and so on and so for...
|
Object oriented programming is fake, a lie, it is all compiled down to assembly where object oriented programming does not exist and your code suffers from the boilerplate code.
| lXciD wrote: | | You can't say functional is better than OOP... but I wouldn't say the other way too... |
Yes I can, and I will, functional programming is 99% of the time better than OOP.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
lXciD
Expert Cheater
 Reputation: 0
Joined: 09 Feb 2006
Posts: 199
Location: SG/MY
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| appalsap wrote: | | lXciD wrote: | | I can only say, if C can do it, so can C++... |
Nope
| lXciD wrote: | | Why bother with all these language which is better thing... Get pass this as fast as possible and start programming... All programming are all the same in their fundamental form... |
Wrong
| lXciD wrote: | Be it assembly, C++, C#, VB.NET, Java, etc... There are all use to develop software... Its the user that matters, not the tool...
|
But if the product is hindered by the language (see: virtual machines) you have a problem.
| lXciD wrote: | | I agree you need to decide which language to learn because some language have their restriction. Like Java totally took control of the memory management portion and you wouldn't be able to develop very in depth window application with Java. You can't develop VB.NET or C# in linux... But you shouldn't be bother about which is better and more powerful... If you are given the power of the world, but you don't know how to use them... Its equal to you doesn't have that power... |
You can do .NET (see: mono) in linux, it just sucks.
| lXciD wrote: | Object Oriented Programming is a concept, not programming language. In the most basic form, They are just putting a hidden 'this' in front of the function parameter. If you program in C you will be doing almost exactly the same... Create structure, pass them to one function... pass them to the other function... and so on and so for...
|
Object oriented programming is fake, a lie, it is all compiled down to assembly where object oriented programming does not exist and your code suffers from the boilerplate code.
| lXciD wrote: | | You can't say functional is better than OOP... but I wouldn't say the other way too... |
Yes I can, and I will, functional programming is 99% of the time better than OOP. |
So tell me what C can do and C++ can't do?
What do you write when you are doing programming? creating variables? creating struct? creating function? writing if else statements? writing loops?
Fundamentally that's what you write in programming. I not going into C have typedef and have pointe and dealing with API. Even for pointers, what Java did is that they force you to use reference when passing non-primitive type between functions. Which is actually a pointer. Just that you don't do it yourself.
The most important thing you need to do to pick up programming is not to learn that VB use Dim to create variables and Java use public int while C++ use just int and C++ allow you to separate header and definition while Java only allow you to have both in one file. etc etc...
Of course, OOP is a concept and I mentioned that in my previous post, its not a programming language. If based on what you said, den C/C++ is a lie, C# is a lie, Java is a lie, VB.NET is a lie. They all will be converted to ASM. Only ASM is the truth... Even ASM is a lie actually because its the binary machine code behind ASM that is the truth...
You wan to glorify functional thats your problem... You think you can achieve better with functional than I have no problem with that. Its up to individual preference whether you like functional or OOP. I'm not a ambassador of OOP nor am I a ambassador for functional. I not trying to change anyone or force anyone to think like me.
Lastly, I know C, C++, Java, C#, VB.NET. (Not counting all the web development language) and I earn a living being a programmer... My main programming language I use in work is C/C++. I have no problem writing in both.
So why bother to decide one when you can learn both?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
benlue
Moderator
![]() Reputation: 0
Joined: 09 Oct 2006
Posts: 2142
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Well , it isn't that i don't believe that your not a programmer , but are those the only languages you know ?! I mean your a programmer for god's sake .
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lXciD
Expert Cheater
Reputation: 0
Joined: 09 Feb 2006
Posts: 199
Location: SG/MY
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 12:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
I not here to write my whole resume... and I don't want to get into a flame war... I just don't like someone quoting my words and give me a one word or one sentence explanation... I have no problem people going against my opinion but I am not open to bashing straight with words like "Nope" and leave you really with no choice but ask him to further elaborate.
Programming language is a tool... What's important is what you know and how you use it.
STL? MFC? Win32? Winsock? DirectX, Ogre3D, OpenAL, OpenGL, Ogg, etc
Then come the Design Patterns like Singleton, Facade, Model-View-Controller, Factory, State Machines, etc...
Data Structures like linked list, vector, queue, stack, map, binary tree.
Then come the part on algorithm like A*, Dijkstra, Huffman, LZ...
Not counting the API (which can be language bounded), all the above mentioned can be implemented in all the languages.
There's so much to learn in being a programmer not just programming language. Except for API and the OS you developing and what you are developing, stuck at what language you are going to learn won't help you much in determining your future. Many, in fact most programmer, will end up learning more than one language in their whole life time.
If you find that my programming language I know is too little, that so be it. I am not a jack of all trade and master of none guy. I don't need to prove anything here anyway...
Knowing ASM doesn't make you 1337 if you can't develop tools that are useful. Making hack is 1337, so do making photoshop...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
