Chacham's Journal: Verbiage: Assembly before C.

Someone asked me about learning C++. I told him to start with Assembly, not to learn it for use, but to learn everything it does and then move onto C. Someone had told me to do that, and i agreed. Just truly understanding CS/DS and how control structures actually work with loop and the compare flag, or near calls, far calls, and the interrupt table, gives a true appreciation for what is actually going on.

What also amazes me is that C is only some tens of instructions. Everything else are just functions made from those keywords.

I still like VB though. I want to know Assembly and C possibly much more than i want to use it.

Hey C r0x0rs!

[Com2Kid]

So much nicer than OO for actually doing stuff. The API is amazingly well designed, it is obvious that a lot of thought went into making an API that flexible and expandable.

Besides, finding a reason to nest snprintfs inside of each other is just too cool. :)

Re:Hey C r0x0rs!

[Com2Kid]

So you don't like C, you don't like Assembly, and you don't like .Net.

If you don't like .Net I am going to assume you don't like Java, since .Net basically rips of Java anyways.

So what DO you program in? Binary? Algol?

Re:Hey C r0x0rs!

[Com2Kid]

• Hey C r0x0rs!
• 
  Moments of Assfuckery in OSS
  What I wouldn't give for a proper case statement in C!
  WHAT KIND OF A FUCKING IDIOT MAKE THE FUCKING C++ COMPILATIO
  Why don't people just add some syntatic sugar to C++?
  C++ won't let me conditionally declare variables

Re:Hey C r0x0rs!

[Chacham]

Hey Com2Kid, pls do not repeat certain things from replies. I never saw the earlier reply. No reason to propogate the earlier potty mouth.

I do enjoy your comments though.

Re:Hey C r0x0rs!

[Com2Kid]

• If you read good books then you would understand that syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semicolon.

C++'s lack of sugar leads to longer code though.

Actually getting SIMPLE things to work in C++ is a pain. For instance, when I have multiple constructors, determining which constructor gets called by default by the inherited class's constructors. (Something text books seemingly ignore, Java textbooks are so bleeming pedantic about those types of details, it becomes rather nice after awhile to have things lai

Re:Hey C r0x0rs!

[Com2Kid]

• class2(...): class1(...) {} //right way
• 
  class2(...) {class1(...);} //wrong way does not "stick"

That first way is valid? Weird. I have never seen that before.

• You don't know/understand what you are talking about and sound too willing to place blame than to learn.

I am not saying that I do not have a lot to learn, I am just saying that it is irritating that C++ is not more apparent / obvious TO learn. I can read though .NET, C, or Python code and it makes sense what is going on.

Scheme code, as

Re:Hey C r0x0rs!

[Com2Kid]

but it really is due to its first goal of supporting the C syntax/semantics.

*note I really must remember to use blockquote now that /. has fixed its ul tags*

But C's semantics are so obvious and easy to get used to. Programming in C I feel so empowered, programming in C++ I feel like "Great, what is the compiler going to complain about next?"

I believe that the compiler should be my friend, and the C++ compiler is NOT my friend!

Scheme's compiler is my friend, it handles all of the boring crud that is blatant

Re:Hey C r0x0rs!

[Com2Kid]

• A constructor is just a fancy function that returns an object.

I never bothered to think of it as returning an object before, just initializing the variables. I thought that new or malloc are the functions that actually return the pointer to a chunk of memory that has been arranged for my object?

Re:Hey C r0x0rs!

[Com2Kid]

Actually I just keep forgetting that C++ Objects can be stored on the stack at all! I still keep popping into the Java frame of mind that all objects have to be NEWed. (One thing Java instructors pound into your head, and Java was my first language).

Though IIRC Ada95 (Pascal derived) has the same rule, but I may be mistaken, especially since I couldn't stand using objects in that language at all. (Although after I learned C I finally understood Ada95!)

Actually learning C and CPU architecture makes a lot

things to know

[huckda]

LISP from an academic point of view to make you a better programmer...

Assembly for the same reason...

C...to code on any platform

VB...to code for windows platform only

Ruby/Python/Perl...

for script'n like a hoochie mama on the server
might throw in Tk or the like if you are into GUI stuff..

then there are things I know...

[huckda]

C..enough to crash machines
Assembly (forgot it ALL after the final exam)
ruby, enough to make cutesy things...
python enough to mangle text files
perl scares the crap outta me
tk.enough to make some cute gui with ruby

lisp..I tried to wrangle...failed miserably
(can I blame it on my parents? both technologically challenged.)

Re:things to know

[Chacham]

Interesting assesment. :)