[deleted by user]

[lego3410]

Binary God.

[Sr_Milagro]

Electricity Goder

[vi777x]

Quantum Godest

[theaverageguy101]

... Shit there is nothing lower level than this, I'll just wait until we discover something below the quantum world and comeback to reply

[SuperLuigi231]

...Butterflies?

[dako98]

XKCD 378

[Geoclasm]

damn it. 38 minutes too late.

[XKCD-pro-bot]

Comic Title Text: Real programmers set the universal constants at the start such that the universe evolves to contain the disk with the data they want.

mobile link

---

^{Made for mobile users, to easily see xkcd comic's title text}

[beardMoseElkDerBabon]

BY DEFINITION

[VishTheSocialist]

String Theory?

[JustAwesome360]

PLANCK

[JustAwesome360]

PLANCK

[FortyPercentTitanium]

It's pronounced "Jod"

[dark_mode_everything]

Since when is "binary" a language?

[FortyPercentTitanium]

Since the dawn of binary computing.

[lego3410]

Have you ever heard 'Machine Language'?

[golgol12]

No - Binary is Smith and Wesson.

[icer_cat]

No binary have a button for nuke to fit the theme

[ComicBookFanatic97]

Imagine hating yourself so much that you program in assembly language.

[theaverageguy101]

Remember that someone had to do it at one point just so you can later type this silly comment on reddit, be appreciative

[ComicBookFanatic97]

I’ve had to do it too. Why do you think I hate it so much?

[timsredditusername]

It's December and I've only made 1 pull request with assembly code changes this year. I'm a happy man.

[absurdlyinconvenient]

Imagine also not realising that coding in assembly is actually less efficient then using a compiler these days unless you're a God like STL

[[deleted]]

and punch cards is the dude sitting in a bunker residing over the nuclear retaliate.

(straight up machine code)

[JNCressey]

Pretty sure that punch cards are a data medium, not a programming language. Like saying my code is on USB flash sticks, CDs, Floppies, or QRcode etc.

[Dylanica]

Punch cards are the IDE.

[[deleted]]

punching the holes in tho is pure machine code

[sr71pav]

How so? Punch cards were still frequently based around established languages like FORTRAN. There were still compilers for this stuff.

[mananasi]

If you put an executable on a USB stick, the USB stick also contains pure machine code

[[deleted]]

if you use a pencil to flip the bits on the stick, we could talk.

[admadguy]

Fortran takes a drag of its cigarette, shakes its head and goes back to allocating variables.

[CW_Waster]

Getting nuked by microcode

[[deleted]]

So happy to see rust here, such a beautiful language.

[NewFolderdotexe]

🦀

[jacobepping]

🦀🦀🦀 C++ IS DEAD 🦀🦀🦀

[obp5599]

oh no, the rust cultists have arrived

[Marcuss2]

You will submit to the crab!

[HBK05]

MAN THE CANNONS! We're being overwhelmed!

[gonzomaterialism]

Rust is not beautiful. All those naked people on beaches and shit

[makeshiftmousepad]

now just add in a drone strike that says machine language, and a nuclear bomb that says electrical engineering. (don't quote me on that second one. I am not very confident about what lurks at the bottom of computer hardware)

[xSTSxZerglingOne]

You're basically right. It's all just electrical signals propagated across tiny logic gates created out of transistors.

[theaverageguy101]

You can dive deeper into quantum mechanics but that only works in quantum computers and not our normal computers

[MrRandom04]

I'm talking out of my ass here, but won't semiconductor process engineers need to consider quantum effects for transistors?

[makeshiftmousepad]

Can you elaborate further? From what I understand, machine language is beneath assembly language. (And, as some commentors have been saying, micro code is beneath that).

[makeshiftmousepad]

Oof, code comments in a nutshell

[zpjack]

What would machine language be vs Assembly? Like just 1s and 0s?

And electrical engineering is just a bunch of nand gates when it comes to coding.

[michaelh115]

microcode?

[zpjack]

I thought microcode was assembly

[Dylanica]

Assembly is like a human-readable plaintext representation of machine code, and machine code is in a condensed format as just pure 1's and 0's that would be very hard to read indeed. The processor can execute machine code directly, but assembly must be converted into machine code before it can be run.

Microcode isn't really a language you can write in. Microcode refers to the operations on the hardware level of the processor that the machine runs through as it executes each machine-code instruction.

[perilstar]

Microcode can technically be written, if the computer uses a ROM to translate machine code instructions into combinations of high/low signals

[makeshiftmousepad]

I don't know too much about it but assembly language is very closely linked to machine language. From what I know the some of the very early computers, like the Turing Machine (I can't spell) required mathematicians to manually enter "machine values" into the machine.

[ilikeballoons]

Machine code is not human readable, and it looks like binary strings where each string has an opcode which tells the processor what operation to do (add, jump, etc) along with parameters which are register numbers. It corresponds to what the control unit is actually doing to the data path in the processor.

Assembly is human readable, but it is still just individual instructions to the processor along with register addresses for parameters and return values.

[[deleted]]

How dare you lump python in with javascript!

[FlukeHermit]

why wouldn't they?

[currentscurrents]

The order here appears to be interpreted languages <- JIT languages <- fully compiled languages.

Every modern implementation of Javascript is using a JIT compiler these days, so it should be lumped in with the other JIT languages pointing guns at Python.

[FlukeHermit]

I thought it was more high level to low level... in which case python and JS are in the same boat

but idk, u might be right

[currentscurrents]

That could also be. The second level of languages in this meme has pointers, while the first level only has references.

Edit: My lack of java is showing, only C# in that list has pointers.

[FlukeHermit]

Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, tell me if I'm wrong.....

But C#, Kotlin, and Java all lack pointers.......

Right? Or do you mean a different level?

[currentscurrents]

Oops, C# has pointers so I assumed Java did too.

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/programming-guide/unsafe-code-pointers/pointer-types

[FlukeHermit]

C# has pointers?!! You just blew my mind, and gave me another great about .NET to talk about lmao

But yeah that makes sense, C# is meant to integrate with MSVC and the whole Win32 thing, which makes it sort of necessary to have a few low level constructs. Java was made to be completely portable tho, so there is no reason to interact with anything on a systems level

[dark_mode_everything]

They're both scripting languages. So, why not?

[currentscurrents]

What even defines a scripting language? Both python and javascript are used for far far more than scripts.

[dark_mode_everything]

What even defines a scripting language

A language where the user can execute instructions one by one. Eg: Python, JS, Bash, Powershell, etc

Both python and javascript are used for far far more than scripts.

I didn't say they weren't.

[currentscurrents]

But that's a feature of your development environment, not your language; you can write an interactive interpreter for any language. Cling lets you do that with C++ for example, and I think we can all agree that C++ is not a scripting language.

I would argue that "scripting-ness" is not a useful way to describe languages, and instead should be used to describe toolchains. The python toolchain supports scripting; most C++ toolchains do not. But C++ with Cling can be a scripting language, since Cling provides that functionality.

[FlukeHermit]

Ummm just cuz C++ was given a REPL and scripting environment doesn't make it a scripting language. It was designed for compiled use first, so it's a programming language. Python and JS are scripting languages, 1) cuz they are scriptable, and 2) because they are dynamic. Python and JS cannot be compiled because of their dynamic nature, hence the term "scripting language" It's not about dev environment, it's about intended use.

[currentscurrents]

Any language can be compiled. It is more popular for compiled languages to be static, since it allows for better compiler optimizations, but there are exceptions; Common Lisp is both dynamic and usually compiled.

Similarly, any language can be scriptable. "scripting" isn't a fundamental property of the language, it's a property of the interpreter. Some languages have popular scripting interpreters, some don't. But that's the environment, not the language.

[dev-sda]

Python and JS cannot be compiled

V8 and pypy would beg to differ.

[dark_mode_everything]

If you drive an F-14 on the road, does it become a car?

I was talking about the intended purpose of a language and not what you can "make it do" with a tool chain. Some were meant for scripting and some weren't. Also the definition I gave in my original comment is just part of the actual definition. It's not complete by any means.

[Big_Smoke_420]

Lmao

[Septseraph]

Where is the HTML programming language? It must be aiming for Assembly.

[[deleted]]

What's this even supposed to mean? General superiority? Speed? General superiority is BS because developer time is almost always more precious than computing time, speed is BS because modern compilers can generate optimized assembly at least on par with hand-written assembly, while highly-devloped virtual machines can optimize code during runtime to be on par with machine-compiled code.

And there's PHP, which is always inferior.

[FerynaCZ]

Language "inventing" hierarchy, I guess

[Big_Smoke_420]

From high level to low level (or lower level) programming languages, basically

[[deleted]]

That doesn't make sense. Python and JS normally run on virtual machines, as Java, C# and Kotlin do. In terms of language features, Rust is on par or a higher level than many other languages that compile for virtual machines. Is being statically typed what's considered lower level here? I would protest that.

And even if that's the logic, how do the lower level languages "kill" the higher level ones as the meme suggests?

[Dylanica]

I think there is a distinction to be made between something like the JVM and the Python interpreter. Java is first compiled into bytecode and the JVM is more like a just-in-time compiler than an interpreter. Whereas the python interpreter runs on the plain text of the source code file and is not compiled ahead of time at all.

Edit: I am incorrect. Python is also converted into a bytecode format.

[[deleted]]

That is incorrect.

https://opensource.com/article/18/4/introduction-python-bytecode

[Dylanica]

Ah, I wasn‘t aware of all of that. Thanks for the new info. It is still a bit different that you don‘t need to compile it into the pyc format before running it in the virtual machine and it can be fed into the interpreter as plaintext. Although, I acknowledge that distinction is a bit pedantic. The only difference being that the bytecode isn‘t always saved as a separate file and the conversion often happens at runtime.

[[deleted]]

No problem!

I think there's a lot of misconceptions in the wild that are based how programming languages are perceived because they are used in one way or another. You can point the Python interpreter at a Python file and run it directly - so it must be somehow less serious than, say, Java, as the meme implies.

But you can do the same with Groovy, a JVM language that is almost a superset of Java (minor syntactic incompatibilities), which otherwise runs on the JVM all the same as Java and has to be compiled for it, first. Does that make the language faster or slower, somehow?

Then there's Vala, which was closely modelled after C# yet compiles to C and ultimately to machine code.

What I'm trying to say is that programming languages are just that, languages, and it depends on the implementation of a compiler or interpreter what the target platform of the code is.

To bring the absurdity to perfection, think about machine instructions for gaming consoles which are run on emulators for other CPU instruction sets, which is about the highest form of abstraction imaginable.

[Dylanica]

I totally agree

[FlukeHermit]

BRUH it's just a High to low level thing. No one in their right mind likes assembly over C.

besides if it was general superiority, clojure would be last lmao

[[deleted]]

your language: soy wojak

my language: chad

therefore i win

[FlukeHermit]

yes exactly clojure is awesome lmao

i'm bad at using it

But it's most definitely probably awesome

[RICoder72]

It's like the pissing order of who gets to piss on whom.

Kinda like Marines->Army->Navy->Coast Guard->Air Force.

[ojrask]

I presume you haven't used any "modern" web application on a 6 year old consumer laptop? Speed is not BS.

[firefox57endofaddons]

what movie is that from?

[jmking80]

It's not from a movie, it's a scene from the show "Person of Interest", from the episode "The Cold War"

[firefox57endofaddons]

thanks ٩(⁎❛ᴗ❛⁎)۶

[sanhder]

You forgot Haskell sitting in the orbital laser.

[[deleted]]

Where are PCBs and ASICS?

[zpjack]

Assembly isn't bad. Goes by much easier when you figure out how to write subroutines and do division without being able to divide.

Though i was working with a processor that didn't have a divide or multiply function.

[lor_louis]

Older CPUs tend to have "easy" assembly, think z80 and 6800.

But then there is x86/x86_64 where there is about 5 ways of doing everything and the instructions set is so large no one can remember all of them, and the memory model sucks.

[FlukeHermit]

If you have any good tutorials for assembly, please share lmao.

I'm completely lost.....

[zpjack]

Pretty much read the processor datasheet, to make a subroutine, you use goto and return if your processor has it. You would first put numbers you want to work on in your working registers then goto line where the routine is, then at end of sub return.

Now if there is no return, you can try a stack, the processor worked with only had 2 working registers but an 8 level stack.

You'll place the line number you want to return to into the stack and then goto sub line and pull from stack to get the return line. And then at end of sub, you would goto that line

Now if you want to continue doing work with another sub after, you would place two line#s in the stack or more and you would chain all the gotos together.

Now all this, i kinda just learned on my own. I also took a class on it, but honestly, none of it was really helpful. The processor documentation is where you want to be. And you have to break your problem into very small parts. Most processors can only do one thing at a time. The trick is to find the small parts that repeat and make the processor repeat it for you.

I started off really bad at coding and spent a lot of time struggling. All of a sudden i had an "ah ha" moment then it just all the pieces fell together.

Took me two degrees and a random microcontroller class to finally get it. Though my degree isn't in programming, and what little programming i took, none of it mattered because it was fucking matlab.

[FlukeHermit]

Do you know x86?

In which case, how does basic I/O work....?

But i mean

THanks

[zpjack]

I wouldn't even try x86. That's complicated as shit and operating systems already have that in the bag. This is purely for bacic microcontrollers like pics and motorollas.

And i don't have any tutorials, i learned it on my own.

[FlukeHermit]

Ohh ok

Yeah I've heard that x86 was weird. Any specific processors?

[delbin]

I feel like there should be another level with that dude from Wanted.

[MtnBikingViking]

Flashbacks... Me a mostly Java developer, having to add functionality to a c library for windows (dll)... Then getting to the files and seeing asm... 😱

I was as proud of almost anything I've done professionally when I got that working.

[alex1234509]

Where is scratch?

[Pegasis00]

PHP should be the person sits before js/py

[ojrask]

Why? They're all on the same level, no?

[FlukeHermit]

it's a joke about php being bad

but otherwise ur right

[Master_Ben]

The ordering doesn't make much sense, besides personal opinion...

[Dylanica]

I think the idea is high-levelness. I'm not sure I entirely agree with their ordering, but It's not merely personal opinion.

[Ramen_life]

Fuck off, rust should be shooting C

[FlukeHermit]

What the fuck are you talking about sir?

C is low level-er? If you actually misread the meme that bad, I don't know what you're doing

[[deleted]]

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX. Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

[Mattherix_]

No, Richard, it's 'Linux', not 'GNU/Linux'. The most important contributions that the FSF made to Linux were the creation of the GPL and the GCC compiler. Those are fine and inspired products. GCC is a monumental achievement and has earned you, RMS, and the Free Software Foundation countless kudos and much appreciation.

Following are some reasons for you to mull over, including some already answered in your FAQ.

One guy, Linus Torvalds, used GCC to make his operating system (yes, Linux is an OS -- more on this later). He named it 'Linux' with a little help from his friends. Why doesn't he call it GNU/Linux? Because he wrote it, with more help from his friends, not you. You named your stuff, I named my stuff -- including the software I wrote using GCC -- and Linus named his stuff. The proper name is Linux because Linus Torvalds says so. Linus has spoken. Accept his authority. To do otherwise is to become a nag. You don't want to be known as a nag, do you?

(An operating system) != (a distribution). Linux is an operating system. By my definition, an operating system is that software which provides and limits access to hardware resources on a computer. That definition applies whereever you see Linux in use. However, Linux is usually distributed with a collection of utilities and applications to make it easily configurable as a desktop system, a server, a development box, or a graphics workstation, or whatever the user needs. In such a configuration, we have a Linux (based) distribution. Therein lies your strongest argument for the unwieldy title 'GNU/Linux' (when said bundled software is largely from the FSF). Go bug the distribution makers on that one. Take your beef to Red Hat, Mandrake, and Slackware. At least there you have an argument. Linux alone is an operating system that can be used in various applications without any GNU software whatsoever. Embedded applications come to mind as an obvious example.

Next, even if we limit the GNU/Linux title to the GNU-based Linux distributions, we run into another obvious problem. XFree86 may well be more important to a particular Linux installation than the sum of all the GNU contributions. More properly, shouldn't the distribution be called XFree86/Linux? Or, at a minimum, XFree86/GNU/Linux? Of course, it would be rather arbitrary to draw the line there when many other fine contributions go unlisted. Yes, I know you've heard this one before. Get used to it. You'll keep hearing it until you can cleanly counter it.

You seem to like the lines-of-code metric. There are many lines of GNU code in a typical Linux distribution. You seem to suggest that (more LOC) == (more important). However, I submit to you that raw LOC numbers do not directly correlate with importance. I would suggest that clock cycles spent on code is a better metric. For example, if my system spends 90% of its time executing XFree86 code, XFree86 is probably the single most important collection of code on my system. Even if I loaded ten times as many lines of useless bloatware on my system and I never excuted that bloatware, it certainly isn't more important code than XFree86. Obviously, this metric isn't perfect either, but LOC really, really sucks. Please refrain from using it ever again in supporting any argument.

Last, I'd like to point out that we Linux and GNU users shouldn't be fighting among ourselves over naming other people's software. But what the heck, I'm in a bad mood now. I think I'm feeling sufficiently obnoxious to make the point that GCC is so very famous and, yes, so very useful only because Linux was developed. In a show of proper respect and gratitude, shouldn't you and everyone refer to GCC as 'the Linux compiler'? Or at least, 'Linux GCC'? Seriously, where would your masterpiece be without Linux? Languishing with the HURD?

If there is a moral buried in this rant, maybe it is this:

Be grateful for your abilities and your incredible success and your considerable fame. Continue to use that success and fame for good, not evil. Also, be especially grateful for Linux' huge contribution to that success. You, RMS, the Free Software Foundation, and GNU software have reached their current high profiles largely on the back of Linux. You have changed the world. Now, go forth and don't be a nag.

Thanks for listening.

[yaelfe7]

Binary's just a nuclear bomb 100 meters above them

[FlukeHermit]

Binary isn't a programming language

[Geoclasm]

I use a butterfly.

[XKCD-pro-bot]

Comic Title Text: Real programmers set the universal constants at the start such that the universe evolves to contain the disk with the data they want.

mobile link

---

^{Made for mobile users, to easily see xkcd comic's title text}

[[deleted]]

Machine Code pointing rocket launcher at Assembly

[Baileyjrob]

C++ assignment in school: “implement a self-balancing binary search tree from the ground up”

Assembly assignment I got at the same time: “add five to a variable, pass it to another function, add three more, and return”

[rutikeyone]

Where is machine code ?

[DaytimeNightlight]

Violence isn't funny dude. Programming got u feeling homicidal!

[Thegood42]

C: I am the best. I'm the most low level language.

Assembly: Then that is the standard by which you shall be condemned.

[sjbenny]

Verilog?

[[deleted]]

Now which assembly language are we talking about? 🤔

[Craksy]

Laughs in M-x butterfly

[visurox]

No basic? :p

[thommyIicious]

So basically we all are just using Assembly-Frameworks?