How Different Programming Languages do the Same Thing

[Steve R.]

A short fun read. Evidently this is one of several similar articles written by the author, Jim Hall.

How different programming languages do the same thing

Whenever I start learning a new programming language, I focus on defining variables, writing a statement, and evaluating expressions.

opensource.com

 

[The_Doc_Man]

The one that would drive folks bonkers is the original ALGOL language, which eventually developed into PASCAL and a few other similar "algorithmic languages." The C family of languages was developed by Bell Laps for their switching network and started life as a series of assembly language macros for the old Digital Equipment Corporation PDP-11 machines. Very few machines could run a truly efficient C at the time, among them being the PDP-11, Motorola 68xxx family, and VAX-11. Since that time, more machines have adapted to use some of the really great hardware addressing modes that you still can find in C, including things like auto-increment and auto-decrement and the equivalent auto-increment-pointer and auto-decrement-pointer.

 

[conception_native_0123]

i did not know list of non-c languages until i read that article. thank you very much. i talk with someone last week from california about library-base languages and he said they getting boring. ha ha

 

[conception_native_0123]

i believe that most languages have many features built into them that do same thing. i would not be surprised at all with that

 

[The_Doc_Man]

In theory, all computer languages that produce "true-compiled" code have the same ability. It is only a matter of how awkward it is to get the compiler to do what you really wanted. It is similar in concept to me (when I was in Montreal as a tourist some years ago) of trying to get directions to a public laundromat. I knew what I wanted but my pronunciation and syntax weren't "normal" to me. The folks I talked to were very patient - as well as amused by my slightly Cajun French accent.

 

[conception_native_0123]

You didn't know what syntax was right? LOL that funny

 

[conception_native_0123]

Your statement leads me to believe what current young people going through in this world. They starting to talk like programmers even if they don't do programming jobs

 

[Isaac]

Your statement leads me to believe what current young people going through in this world. They starting to talk like programmers even if they don't do programming jobs

They are certainly strongly typed these days

 

[conception_native_0123]

They are certainly strongly typed these days

strongly typed?

 

[Isaac]

strongly typed?

Easily offended, overly identarian, non-conforming.

 

[conception_native_0123]

Easily offended, overly identarian, non-conforming.

bible says that too. that just came to mind. no i not a christian but not sure why i had that thoughht. i believe that offense has come from people not knowing how technology work. they were thrown in. i say this before. but they let it happen to them. corporations are issue.

 

[conception_native_0123]

non-conforming.

non-conforming to what?

 

[Isaac]

non-conforming to what?

Just generally.

We all have to conform to things in life - expectations, protocols, dress codes, professional behavior at work, common courtesies, rules, laws, limits, boundaries, etc.
Then, on the other hand, we need to have an adventurous, individualistic side - the side of us that occasionally defies an expectation or protocol, if there is a good reason for it, one that outweighs the basis for the protocol's existence in the first place.

As time goes by, the younger generations have been taught an emphasis on non-conformity. In my personal opinion, it was a good idea as compared to societal behavior, say, 75 years ago. But, has now gone a little too far. People are taught to desire to challenge and defy almost every single expectation they encounter - whereas in real life, success does, in fact, come by conforming/defying at something more like a 99/1 ratio. Too many people see themselves as heroes for changing that to more like 1/99.

 

[conception_native_0123]

As time goes by, the younger generations have been taught an emphasis on non-conformity. In my personal opinion, it was a good idea as compared to societal behavior, say, 75 years ago. But, has now gone a little too far. People are taught to desire to challenge and defy almost every single expectation they encounter - whereas in real life, success does, in fact, come by conforming/defying at something more like a 99/1 ratio. Too many people see themselves as heroes for changing that to more like 1/99.

do you think that because of undiscplined nature of human race in general? again, corporations are serious problem and they manipulate unintelligent people. can not stop it

 

[The_Doc_Man]

again, corporations are serious problem and they manipulate unintelligent people. can not stop it

No, corporations are NOT the problem. Unintelligent people are the problem. If they would get their heads out of the sand and actually work towards getting a better education, they would not be so easily manipulated. It is a more complex form of "survival of the fittest" where the key survival skill is... skills.

In the world of nature before Man was civilized, did you say that it was always the predator's fault that someone died? Or did you say the person was careless and didn't know how to protect himself? If you see the world as still engaging in a battle of survival, but on a different plane, then you learn that corporations are no more a problem now than the saber-tooth tiger was a problem 100,000 years ago. Not more, not less - just different.

 

[conception_native_0123]

No, corporations are NOT the problem. Unintelligent people are the problem. If they would get their heads out of the sand and actually work towards getting a better education, they would not be so easily manipulated.

i know what you saying doc man but maybe what i mean is that people who do not have high level of intelligence just do not have ability to havec it. do you think? that really is what i meant. thank you.

It is a more complex form of "survival of the fittest" where the key survival skill is... skills.

i read article in news last month where a bakery in the united states hiring anyone who applied. they did not care about the skill levvel of the people they would hire. what you think about that?

If you see the world as still engaging in a battle of survival, but on a different plane, then you learn that corporations are no more a problem now than the saber-tooth tiger was a problem 100,000 years ago. Not more, not less - just different.

yes i guess you are right. i agree yes. but that does not change my argument. manipulation of weak by stronger people stilll going on. it seems like it can never be stopped. tiger or corporation. strong is strong. weak is weak.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Your "bakery" question could be simple. If the person being hired would have to make deliveries by car or truck, their baking skills are not an issue. Many restaurants in my area have hired extra people for food delivery. If the person with no skills is going to be a baker, the hiring person must think they can teach someone what skills they need. On-Job Training, or OJT as we call it.

As to your complaint about exploitation, we will ALWAYS have stronger and weaker people. No two people are alike. And as far as somehow trying to control corporations, we run into the age-old philosophical problem for which the appropriate quote is attributed to Roman philosopher Juvenal (late 1st century/early 2nd century AD): "Quis custodiet ipsos custodies"? Or... Who watches the watchers?

On a more mundane level, we had a case in New Orleans a couple of years ago where a construction company took some shortcuts that lead to the collapse of a new hotel they were building. The folks who were tasked with building inspections - who would be a type of watchman for obedience to building codes - didn't do their jobs because they were given incentive to look the other way. This is a case where NO ONE was watching the watcher and 3 people died in the collapse. The criminal and political ramifications are still ongoing.

This example is meant to convey a point. I hear your argument - but how do you propose to hold corporations in check when they have their hooks in the people who would monitor and control them? Or if they don't have those people in pocket now, how long do you think it will take? This is the way of the world. Do you know the old joke (not necessarily funny) about how fast you have to run to escape being eaten by a lion? The answer is, faster than the slowest hunter in your group. There will always be faster and slower, stronger and weaker, smarter and dumber, and that is because we reproduce by random genetic selection, not by cloning (that would make us all identical.) So... what do you propose as a solution?

Remember that people get tired of that constant vigilance. The Roman Empire faded because of it. Our philosopher friend Juvenal had this to say about government that has population participation: “The people that once bestowed commands, consulships, legions, and all else, now concerns itself no more, and longs eagerly for just two things: bread and circuses!”

 

[Isaac]

Here's a different take.

Maybe it's not always corporations that have power over people.

Many major corporations, over the past month, announced certain political positions on the Georgia voting bill issue. They did this in response to people's (customer's) demands....at least, in response to what they perceived as demands or wishes from their customers and the general market.

Who is exercising power over who, there?

 

[conception_native_0123]

Or... Who watches the watchers?

'well who is going to monitor the monitors of the monitors'.

that said by will smiths wife at the end of his movie . i think it called enemy of the state. i liked that one. ha ha ha

 

[conception_native_0123]

On a more mundane level, we had a case in New Orleans a couple of years ago where a construction company took some shortcuts that lead to the collapse of a new hotel they were building. The folks who were tasked with building inspections - who would be a type of watchman for obedience to building codes - didn't do their jobs because they were given incentive to look the other way. This is a case where NO ONE was watching the watcher and 3 people died in the collapse. The criminal and political ramifications are still ongoing.

have you heard the collapse of the silver bridge in point pleasent virginia? i think it happen in 1967. the local townspeople said it was cause of the mothman!

but how do you propose to hold corporations in check when they have their hooks in the people who would monitor and control them? Or if they don't have those people in pocket now, how long do you think it will take? This is the way of the world.

there is no solution. rich people support rich people. poor support poor. you are right. i guess what i say meant nothing.