|
Its definitly not LISP,
But it has a place.
Regardz
Colin J Davies
* WARNING *
This could be addictive
The minion's version of "Catch ![Green Alien | [Alien]](https://codeproject.freetls.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/alien.gif) "
It's a real shame that people as stupid as you can work out how to use a computer. said by Christian Graus in the Soapbox
|
|
|
|
|
And why not, it just a matter of writing a compiler for the CLR, lets face who ever though Eiffel would be supported, but it is!
|
|
|
|
|
I noticed a lot of people did not vote SQL very well. Thats fair enough, but I think its going to come into play a lot more, when you realise that MS's new file system is going to be based on it. Maybe I am wrong though
|
|
|
|
|
I voted for SQL because just about all my projects are based on using a SQL database to handle most of the application's data. I did miss the XML option though...
John
|
|
|
|
|
But, what about OODB (Object Orient Data Base)?
if the languages are mostly OO, they will need (in the near future) a data base that support this objects directly, without the necessity to program an intermediate layer.
May be you think "He's mad", but i'm not the only one.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not certain how they could equal the performance of a relational database and I don't see how you can ever do away with that layer for so many other reasons anyway.
Actually, I have never seen any evidence that they even exist except in passing reference in books and in posts like this one. 
|
|
|
|
|
I voted C++,C# and Xml,
but i saw, that two people voted for 'English'.. it is IMHO very intereesting idea.
Not for complicated applications but i think that, lot of simple windows and web applications can be writen in 'English'.
The bigest problem is to understand natural language  .
Can you imagine it 
Main: Show message with text "Hallo world".
<code>Compiler error: You have not enough respect to compiler !</code>
Main: Can you please show message with text "Hallo world".
<code>Compilation succesfull.</code>
Scaring, isn't it  ?
i'm only pointer to myself
|
|
|
|
|
Seems good idea.
What developers do from BEGINNING it is overcoming of
semantic gap between human and computer.
Selecting English we solve this problem but what say
another nations (French, Russian, Czech etc.).
Another answer was "body language", may be it is better.
|
|
|
|
|
Or we can just simply connect our brains to computer using USB and it will do what we want.
i'm only pointer to myself
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, although I'm sure the operation to have a USB port installed in your brain isn't very comfortable...
If your nose runs and your feet smell, then you're built upside down.
|
|
|
|
|
And until Microsoft understands that rebooting the human brain is not acceptable, I don't want anything plugged in there!
|
|
|
|
|
From another side if you obtain grant for Network
Administration you can reboot Bill Gates' brain
and even reload some software.
|
|
|
|
|
Has been tried before - Human language isn't precise enough for today's machines.
Doing exactly what you're told, not what the instructions mean, is a basic technique of civil disobedience. So imagine, computers that refuse to do what they should, and putting the blame on you saying the wrong thing...
"Dor säggsische Dialeggt eechnet sich wie keeen onderor für den Ausdrugg zäärdlischor Gefiehle."
sighist | Agile Programming | doxygen
|
|
|
|
|
Is Smalltalk.
Its the most productive, and enjoyable "experience". Use it for any period of time, and you will end up me: Waking up in the mornings dreading the thought of going to work, because you'll have to use compilers and IDEs in which you can't select a chunk of code, right click on it and select "do it", and have it run before your very eyes.
The syntax is highly offputting to begin with though.
Why is Smalltalk not even in this list? There are free Smalltalk environments for Windows.
I can't believe it was created in the '70s, some of the concepts, 30 years old, ahead of their time, and todays mainstream ide's don't implement them.
WHY?!?! WHY MUST WE LIVE IN THE DARK!?!?!
|
|
|
|
|
"There are free Smalltalk environments for Windows."
There are free Perl environments for Windows. It doesn't make it a popular or worthwhile investment...
"werewnt we going to run off and start a convent on as islandf]"
-David Wulff, again on MSN while plastered...
Jonathan 'nonny' Newman
Homepage [www.nonny.com] [^]
Blog [^]
|
|
|
|
|
Please never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever mention smalltalk again. Random crashes after working for hours on a project are just half of it's problems. And it's not like you can save every 15 mins, seeing as you have to take a friggin image of the whole vm just to save a few changes.
They made us learn smalltalk for my OO class in college, and i swear no one ever touches the stuff after that.
You're right today's mainstream IDE's don't implement smalltalk's example. Thank goodness.
D Daniel Larsen, Professional Casanova
Blood, Sweat, Toil and Tears
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel Larsen wrote:
They made us learn smalltalk for my OO class in college, and i swear no one ever touches the stuff after that.
I agree same here. And the IDE that was available for me at the time (about 10 years ago) was very unstable for me also...
John
|
|
|
|
|
Smalltalk might be a good language to use when teaching OO, because its very hard to avoid OO when using Smalltalk. Even the figure 42 is an object.
In most other languages you can avoid using OO-methods.
Ture
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't everything an object in C#?
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
I know all data types, predefined and user-defined, inherit from the System.Object class. I guess what is missing is values.
John
|
|
|
|
|
What in C# is not an object? Even an Integer is derrived from the Object-Class.
Thomas Krause
|
|
|
|
|
In my opinion Yes, everything is an object. I posted a similar question[^] not long ago in the C# forum and the only person who responded (David Stone) said that value types are not objects.
I disagree. I think an object is just a instance of a type that has properties and/or methods. How it's allocated is not really relevant. In C++ an instance of a class can be allocated on the stack, just like a value type in C#, yet it's still considered an object.
Also, the fact that everything derives from System.Object is yet another indication that everything is an object.
Regards,
Alvaro
Hey! It compiles! Ship it.
|
|
|
|
|
Alvaro Mendez wrote:
Also, the fact that everything derives from System.Object is yet another indication that everything is an object
Pointers are .NET types and they do not derive from System.Object. See this article[^] for details:
We were led to believe in C# that everything is an object. However, this is not true. Pointers are indeed a recognized type in CLR; but, they are neither a descendant of Object nor of ValueType - they are a root of their own, with no member functions, not ToString(), not even GetType().
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the link.
OK, so pointers are the exception to the rule. But then again, unmanaged code is also the exception in .NET.
Regards,
Alvaro
Hey! It compiles! Ship it.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
