The real execution speed concept is well- and carefully-designed algorithm, relying on compiler optimization is for stupid programmers.
I like this meme.
A fully static and compiled language environment is not better in any sense.. than a fully dynamic and interpreted.. language environment.
Bad compiled code can fail at compile time, bad interpreted code fails at runtime. If I have complete test coverage or a mathematical proof of code correctness, the latter is not a problem. In real life, I don't always get that. Then, I am ready to trade some flexibility for the additional safety offered by the compiler.
compilers impose restirctions, you are forced to use macros, which are just kludge, but in a pure interpreted language (PicoLisp for example) you can simply use functions,..
Homoiconic syntax and seamless meta-programming, fair point. AFAIK, the price you pay for that is the syntax of the language directly reflecting the structure of the AST. Most programmers seem to think that this makes it less human-readable.
"They are focusing on machines. But in fact we need to focus on humans, on how humans care about doing programming or operating the application of the machines. We are the masters. They are the slaves."
To my experience, software development is about making machines do what humans want. To achieve that, one has to understand both sides and and then bridge the differences between them. Focusing on the human side is IMHO just as unhelpful as focusing on the machine's side.
- Could you make decent and fastest web app/server using PURE Python, Ruby or JS? NOPE.
- Could you make decent modern AAA game using PURE Python, Ruby or JS? NOPE.
- Could you program IOT devices using PURE Python, Ruby or JS? NOPE.
- Could you make Operation System/Kernel Driver using PURE Python, Ruby or JS? NOPE.
So all of this interpreted languages are not general-purpose languages, because of such limitations.
@Fungi: Repeat this mantra: Programming Language is a tool! Say it about 100x times a day, you'll see things better and clearer . Also, you'll love peace more than hatred
Every tool is on its user, skilled user would view the tool is wonderful, unskilled user would view the tool is insufficient.
Guess you had quite bad time and hadn't quite time to cool your head.
@Fungi I won't discuss compiled vs. dynamic languages, because the topic is obviously going nowhere, and you and I both have better things we can be doing.
However your attack on me and @jibal's person is not only a very low blow, but IMO unfounded.
"you are ignorant + arrogant, which makes you the worst people."
Let's look up ignorant, shall we?
lacking in knowledge or training; unlearned:
This can be disputed.
in your eyes, I'm obviously lacking in knowledge because according to you interpreted languages are the best and everything else has no purpose.
However, we have multiple skilled and knowledgeable programmers who agree/attest to what @jibal and I have said.
If you came into a court of law saying I killed a man and I came with 4 other people saying I didn't, who do you think would win?
What about arrogant? Let's look that one up as well.
making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearingly assuming; insolently proud:
Let's see, what assumptions did I make?
All of the facts I stated I can get sources for and are the truth.
Did I ever claim to be smarter or more knowledgeable than you? Not that I can tell, I just disputed your claims.
This site: http://ronrosstoday.com/arrogance/ has a great guide on how to detect arrogance.
I really want argue against some of your points in your second post, but I won't feed the troll anymore.
I hereby swear that I will not reply to this thread after this post.
replying non-technical people sucks. @hcorion, @jibal, listen, you are ignorant + arrogant, which makes you the worst people.
Some psychopathic imbecile thinks I'm "nontechnical". That's funny.
ManfredLotz: Hope they will ban you here.
Online 19/04/17 11:43 UTC Status Troll