Programming Languages, "to C or not to C, that is the Q."

From: Scotty Fitzgerald (sfitz007_at_bestweb.net)
Date: 01/22/05

  • Next message: Rick Taylor: "Re: Video surveillance options" 
    Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 16:55:02 -0500
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org

    Hi, All,

    I was raised on Basic, (PDP 11/70 RSTS/E, TRS-80, Vic-20, Gw-basic)
    Then did Pascal in College. Now that I don't have to spend all
    my time on the computer getting updates from microsoft, I think
    I will try my hand at a little traditional programming.

    So, I see like a billion languages available. I have a few
    questions, but would any general opinions on "language to
    learn" you may have. Please don't feel I am not interested
    if you have thoughts don't directly relate to what I write below.
    (end, plea for verbosity.)

    I notice two basic interpreters under woody. Why no compiler?!

    I also notice that many of the "Wirth Bondage and Dominance"
    languages (pascal, modula, oberon) have a program that "converts
    to C" and then I guess you would compile the c program. Why
    is this? I am guessing it has to do with porting (like, take
    your C output and you can compile it for mac or windows or something._
    Any other reasons?

            How readable are these "whatever to C" program's
            output?! Can you see the subroutines in there, know
            what they are in relation to what you wrote in, say,
            pascal, and maybe tweak it in C? (I am waiting for
            my library to ILL a book for me, "C as a second lang.
            for Pascal users. Catchy title, huh?!

    C does interest me, though for some reason object oriented
    does not sound appealing ot me. However, I hear of it as
    something that is not a true HLL. I hear it is more like
    a "universal assembler" of sorts. I love being able to do
    structured programming and I think I am better off with a true
    HLL, am I wrong?!

    I heard a quote that Algol is better than many of it's successors.
    Is it still alive? I hear it is just a little younger than
    LISP. Are these languages truly still alive?! What about forth?!

    Let me know what your thoughts are, as I would love to hear them! 

    ---
Scotty
-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
  • Next message: Rick Taylor: "Re: Video surveillance options"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: teaching programming to children
      ... > programming (after I shortly described my programming job as telling ... the need to compile and the differences between the ... > languages of humans and languages of computers. ...
      (comp.lang.python)
    • Re: KDP2 on Intel MACS
      ... Real Basic is very similar to Visual Basic from a programming standpoint. ... for most if not all future programs, the execution and even compile speeds ... object-oriented programming languages. ... for $500, which adds the ability to compile cross-platform (Windows, MacOS, ...
      (sci.optics)
    • _How _scalable _is _Forth ??
      ... Mr Bennet says " As somebody who loves to learn new programming ... If you learned whats inside and learned whats wrong inside, ... it is never in [compile] mode so dont need STATE ... As somebody who loves to learn new programming languages and ...
      (comp.lang.forth)
    • Re: compiler for Chinese development language
      ... This relates to the development of vernacular ... Indian vernacular display, OS and programming languages. ... Bangla and other vernaculars. ...
      (comp.compilers)
    • Re: Head-in-the-Sand Liberals (LA Times Columnist)
      ... You claimed to have known several computer languages, ... If you lie about knowing computer languages, ... of the programming loop for a functional ... You also don't know Java. ...
      (rec.org.mensa)