|
 
0101001101110101011100000111000001101111
0111001101100101001000000111100101101111
0111010101110010001000000110011001100001
0111011001101111011101010111001001101001
0111010001100101001000000110110001100001
0110111001100111011101010110000101100111
0110010100100000011101110110000101110011
0010000001101101011000010110010001100101
0010000001100001011101100110000101101001
0110110001100001011000100110110001100101
0010000001100101011101100110010101110010
0111100101110111011010000110010101110010
0110010100111010001000000110100101110100
0010000001100011011100100110010101100001
0111010001100101011100110010000001100011
0110110001101001011001010110111001110100
0010000001100001011100000111000001110011
0010110000100000011011010110111101100010
0110100101101100011001010010000001100001
0111000001110000011100110010110000100000
0110100101110100001000000111000001101111
0111011101100101011100100111001100100000
0111011101100101011000100010000001110000
0110000101100111011001010111001100101100
0010000001100100011011110110010101110011
0010000001110100011010000110010100100000
0110010001100001011101000110000101100010
0110000101110011011001010010000001100011
0110000101101100011011000111001100101100
0010000001101000011000010110111001100100
0110110001100101001000000101010101001001
0010000001101100011000010111100101101111
0111010101110100011100110010110000100000
0110111101110010001000000110010101101101
0110001001100101011001000110010001100101
0110010000100000011001000110010101110110
0110010101101100011011110111000001101101
0110010101101110011101000010111000100000
0100010101110110011001010111001001111001
0111010001101000011010010110111001100111
0010111000100000010000010110111001100100
0010000001101001011101000010000001110111
0110000101110011001000000110011001100001
0111001101110100001000000110000101101110
0110010000100000011001010110011001100110
0110100101100011011010010110010101101110
0111010000101110001000000101011101101111
0111010101101100011001000010000001111001
0110111101110101001000000111011101100001
0110111001110100001000000110101001110101
0111001101110100001000000110111101101110
0110010100100000011011000110000101101110
0110011101110101011000010110011101100101
00111111
|
|
|
|
|
For there to be just one language for everything it would be so complex no one would no how to use it to it's fullest capacity. The right tool for the right job!
|
|
|
|
|
Chinese Natural Language.
|
|
|
|
|
Ada? College flashbacks.... *shudder*
|
|
|
|
|
I do remember that I actually liked ada. Although I think I had it for like 6 weeks total in one single class in college. It was in a class that we briefly looked at lisp, ada and smalltalk.
John
|
|
|
|
|
It was the primary language we used for the first 2 years of classes. I guess as languages go it wasn't that bad. Add in the instructors, course work, and late nights in the computer lab.. 
|
|
|
|
|
All in the same language. I would like even to define database in the same language as the application.
That would mean using Object Oriented databases.
|
|
|
|
|
Like to do code and develop apps,no matter what is the language.Because i think symbol is different,but logic is indifferent  !
|
|
|
|
|
Reality is the Dev lanscape is ever changing, so we should be ever learning. Obviously there is no way to learn every language, but staying current in several varieties is a must.
|
|
|
|
|
How many of us would implement something in assembler even if it were (for some strange reason) the most suiting for the job?
It is a paradox that paradoxes would actually exist in reality.
That means of course that they don't exist.
However, they do!
∫(Edo )dx = Tzumer
∑k( this.Kid) k = this. ♥
|
|
|
|
|
101000101001010100101010101010101011010001010010101001010101
010101010110100010100101010010101010101010101101000101001010
100101010101010101011010001010010101001010101010101010110100
010100101010010101010101010101101000101001010100101010101010
101011010001010010101001010101010101010110100010100101010010
101010101010101101000101001010100101010101010101011010001010
010101001010101010101010110100010100101010010101010101010101
101000101001010100101010101010101011010001010010101001010101
010101010110100010100101010010101010101010101101000101001010
100101010101010101011010001010010101001010101010101010110100
010100101010010101010101010101101000101001010100101010101010
101011010001010010101001010101010101010110100010100101010010
101010101010101101000101001010100101010101010101011010001010
010101001010101010101010110100010100101010010101010101010101
101000101001010100101010101010101011010001010010101001010101
010101010110100010100101010010101010101010101101000101001010
100101010101010101011010001010010101001010101010101010110100
010100101010010101010101010101101000101001010100101010101010
101011010001010010101001010101010101010110100010100101010010
101010101010101101000101001010100101010101010101011010001010
010101001010101010101010110100010100101010010101010101010101
101000101001010100101010101010101011010001010010101001010101
010101010110100010100101010010101010101010101101000101001010
100101010101010101011010001010010101001010101010101010110100
010100101010010101010101010101101000101001010100101010101010
101011010001010010101001010101010101010110100010100101010010
10101010101010110100010100101010010101010101010101
|
|
|
|
|
OK, except you,
btw, you have a bug there, you typed a 0 instead of 1 here:
101010010101010101010101101000101001010
It is a paradox that paradoxes would actually exist in reality.
That means of course that they don't exist.
However, they do!
∫(Edo )dx = Tzumer
∑k( this.Kid) k = this. ♥
|
|
|
|
|
It's not a bug, it's art 
|
|
|
|
|
01011001011011110111010100100111
01110010011001010010000001100011
01101111011001000110010100100000
01101001011100110010000001101010
01110101011100110111010000100000
01100111011010010110001001100010
01100101011100100110100101110011
01101000001011100010000001010000
01101100011001010110000101110011
01100101001000000111001001100101
01110100011100100111100100100000
01100001011011100110010000100000
01110000011011110111001101110100
00100000011000010110011101100001
011010010110111000101110
It was broke, so I fixed it.
|
|
|
|
|
S Houghtelin wrote: 01011001011011110111010100100111
01110010011001010010000001100011
01101111011001000110010100100000
01101001011100110010000001101010
01110101011100110111010000100000
01100111011010010110001001100010
01100101011100100110100101110011
01101000001011100010000001010000
01101100011001010110000101110011
01100101001000000111001001100101
01110100011100100111100100100000
01100001011011100110010000100000
01110000011011110111001101110100
00100000011000010110011101100001
011010010110111000101110
010010010010000001100011011011110110111001100011011101010111001000100001
010010010010000001110111011011110110111001100100011001010111001000100000
011101110110100001100001011101000010000001000011010100000101010100100000
011010000110010100100000011101110110000101110011001000000111011101110010
011010010111010001101001011011100110011100100000011101000110100001100001
011101000010000001100110011011110111001000101110
|
|
|
|
|
Maimonides wrote: the most suiting for the job
The question doesn't state that.
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm  actually it does:
2nd answer: No, I prefer to use the language that best suits the specific task
It is a paradox that paradoxes would actually exist in reality.
That means of course that they don't exist.
However, they do!
∫(Edo )dx = Tzumer
∑k( this.Kid) k = this. ♥
|
|
|
|
|
I learnd Pascal, C++, VB, C#, SQL and some Sript things, it was a bit of fun.
I don't like to learn the same again, e.g. how works a combo-box in VB, C++, C#, ASP, etc.
I don't like to learn the small differences between MS-SQL, Oracle or MySQL.
I don't like to learn the diffrent short-cuts in any programms.
Programming is my passion, but it is not an easy task. 
*** Fast Prototyping ***
|
|
|
|
|
GUI is a one little, specific task. It makes sense to use just one, specific language for it. Fortunately, GUI is just a tiny (and often irrelevant) bit of programming.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I meant - GUI development is *very* specific. Majority of programmers should never touch it - it requires some very unusual and rare talents. That's the reason why most of the software out there is barely usable, with ugly and slow GUI. How many of the modern coders are capable of implementing a fully asynchronous UI? How many are aware of all the rules and tricks of the usability? How many are even aware of the usability testing methodologies?
I admit that I'm helpless in anything-GUI, and so, I never wrote a single line of a GUI code in my whole 20+yrs career. But the others are not that honest, they're trying to implement GUIs without being actually capable of doing it right.
Fortunately, GUIs are only required for a very narrow set of tasks, and the vast majority of programming is not related to any kind of graphical interfaces (or any user interaction at all). There are no UIs in embedded development, no UIs in high-frequency trading, no UIs in compilers, no UIs in network infrastructure-level coding, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
The becoming of the GUI development seems that will be to make the front end in HTML.
The web interfaces are becoming more usable than desktop.
|
|
|
|
|
But yet, they require the same skill set and the same rare talents. Majority of coders are doing them wrong. How many web interfaces you can list which are really usable, nice and smooth? I definitely won't run out of fingers on such a list.
|
|
|
|
|
All google sites, all ms sites, almos all yahoo sites.
The point is that is very easy to develop GUIs with html/css/javascript
|
|
|
|
|
Yahoo is totally unusable and aesthetically unacceptable. Google mail became barely usable only recently. Navigation in most of the MS sites is a total nightmare. Even a google search UI is not ideal - e.g., an access to the cached copies is confusing.
Looks like we're setting a threshold of tolerance on very different levels. In my opinion, 99.99% of those who are currently doing a "very easy" job of "developing GUIs with html/css/javascript" should have never started.
Actually, the underlying technology is totally irrelevant. It does not matter if UI is implemented on top of HTML5 stack, or pure Win32, or WPF, or GTK+, or Qt, or whatever else. The relevant skills and talents are outside of the programming scope, they're more akin to art, and for this reason, rare.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
