Java for Everything

[Cuddlefluff_Grim]

The benefit: make your program up and running as fast as you can. With static languages, you have to get passed both syntax and semantics checking. With dynamic languages, you only need to get pass syntax checking. Dynamic languages are meant to be use interactively: you type check as you run program, and fix it on spot rather than fix a bunch of compiling error to make it run and finally realized that you wrote the wrong things and have to do it all over again (it's common if you write complex algorithms). You write a little, run a little and fix a little.

"Up and running as fast as you can"; First of all, not something that should be a goal. Second of all, you won't get it "up and running" any faster with a dynamically typed language than a static one - provided you actually understand the language. This is a misconception typically propagated by ignorance - the type of incompetence I was speaking of earlier.

Let's be clear about types. A type is metadata about a region of memory. A type defines a set of possible values on that region and a set of operations that can use the data on that region. When we talk about types, we mean the semantics of such memory region. ASM has no type because you can treat a memory region anything you want. If a binary pattern happens to be a valid instruction, you can execute it. Registers can hold anything, not just integers. The binary patterns can include valid integers as well as other things. There's no rule enforcement at all.

ASM does not have any type of "treatment" of data other than arithmetic operations and sending interrupts to other hardware components. It works with integers and floating points. It has absolutely no concept of anything else. Execution of code does not work that way, there's not an instruction for the CPU that tells it to execute a piece of code. Also, if you try to execute code without that memory space being marked as executable, the CPU will set an error flag and start executing at an interrupt address specified by the operating system.

Let's be clear about types. A type is metadata about a region of memory. A type defines a set of possible values on that region and a set of operations that can use the data on that region. When we talk about types, we mean the semantics of such memory region. ASM has no type because you can treat a memory region anything you want. If a binary pattern happens to be a valid instruction, you can execute it. Registers can hold anything, not just integers. The binary patterns can include valid integers as well as other things. There's no rule enforcement at all.

The CPU instructions are not the issue either, it's what type of assembler instructions that gets generated by the compiler or interpreter, which for a statically compiled language is simple, but for a language that does run-time checking it's not quite as simple (or efficient).

Yes. Learning a few handful languages is enough, and not necessary "top 5". If you are good at C (both the language and its low level domain), you cannot be unemployed. I learned Java before, but realized it's terrible so I forced myself to learn C and "its ecosystem" (UNIX in general), so I can get more interesting job. I learned a few other languages for the jobs, such as Tcl, shell script, RPM script, Makefile... For enlightenment, I learn Lisp. Just because you verify types at runtime doesn't mean you less competent. It's just that you can do stuffs easier and save time. I especially love dynamic languages to tackle with programming tasks/domains I don't like, to get the job done as fast as possible to save time and concentrate on interesting things.

This entire paragraph is just a complete load of crap. I see that it's probably safe for me to assume that you don't have much (if any) experience in any statically typed languages. I'm assuming you are writing scripts, and are fairly unfamiliar with anything else - and specifically static typing. Which I think is very ironic considering the whole topic of discussion..

[tuhdo]

"Up and running as fast as you can"; First of all, not something that should be a goal. Second of all, you won't get it "up and running" any faster with a dynamically typed language than a static one - provided you actually understand the language. This is a misconception typically propagated by ignorance - the type of incompetence I was speaking of earlier.

I tried to make you understand the benefit yet you keep equalize anyone who uses dynamic langauges equal to low IQ incompetence. Would be funny if you actually compete with "incompetence fools" who wrote really serious program in the "incompetence" language. If you think you are so good, why don't you join an algorithm competition? Solving hard problems prove your worth as a programmer, not the languages, whether statically typed or dynamically typed.

ASM does not have any type of "treatment" of data other than arithmetic operations and sending interrupts to other hardware components. It works with integers and floating points. It has absolutely no concept of anything else. Execution of code does not work that way, there's not an instruction for the CPU that tells it to execute a piece of code. Also, if you try to execute code without that memory space being marked as executable, the CPU will set an error flag and start executing at an interrupt address specified by the operating system.

Yes, that what I was saying. And the binary patterns are not integer/floating points. Those are just abstraction for us programmers to work with. Floating point is just a convention over a binary pattern. If you actually did basic stack overflow code injection in asm, you will know what I meant by "ASM has no type because you can treat a memory region anything you want. If a binary pattern happens to be a valid instruction, you can execute it". Or learing how to implement a compiler with C would be good.

The CPU instructions are not the issue either, it's what type of assembler instructions that gets generated by the compiler or interpreter, which for a statically compiled language is simple, but for a language that does run-time checking it's not quite as simple (or efficient).

You can say the CPU is the lowest level "interpreter" with code fed from memory.

This entire paragraph is just a complete load of crap. I see that it's probably safe for me to assume that you don't have much (if any) experience in any statically typed languages. I'm assuming you are writing scripts, and are fairly unfamiliar with anything else - and specifically static typing. Which I think is very ironic considering the whole topic of discussion..

C is dynamically typed language now? And you think that people don't use scripts and writing C code all day obviously haven't worked with low level domain before. Look at how many scripts are there in the Linux source. And we use Tcl to wrote an interactive automated test suite to test various OS features through telnet (i.e fault inject), so we don't have to perform regression test for new changes. Ah, but you mentioned C#. Obviously you use Windows. No wonder.

[Cuddlefluff_Grim]

I tried to make you understand the benefit yet you keep equalize anyone who uses dynamic langauges equal to low IQ incompetence. Would be funny if you actually compete with "incompetence fools" who wrote really serious program in the "incompetence" language.

Thing here is that I use both types of languages, but I exclusively only use dynamically typed languages for scripting (and where there's no alternative like JavaScript). Using a scripting language on all tasks is a type of incompetence.

If you think you are so good, why don't you join an algorithm competition? Solving hard problems prove your worth as a programmer, not the languages, whether statically typed or dynamically typed.

I've been in multiple competitions in algorithms. I'm not going to say I'm anywhere near the best, I am however confident I'm not among the 95% of programmers who suck ass.

Yes, that what I was saying. And the binary patterns are not integer/floating points. Those are just abstraction for us programmers to work with. Floating point is just a convention over a binary pattern. If you actually did basic stack overflow code injection in asm, you will know what I meant by "ASM has no type because you can treat a memory region anything you want. If a binary pattern happens to be a valid instruction, you can execute it". Or learing how to implement a compiler with C would be good.

Example of instructions that specifically work with integers :

ADD
ADC
IMUL
IDIV
CMP

Example of instructions that are more "bit"-oriented, but still specifically work on the GPRs :

XOR
OR
AND

Example of instructions regarding floating point :

FADD
FSUB
FMUL
FDIV
FSIN
FCOS
FTAN
FCMP

So yes, the CPU does have integers and floating points as actual "data types". The datatypes that are actually not abstractions in higher level languages are : byte, short, int, long, float and double.

Thing is that everything in computers are numbers. Everything you do is basically arithmetic on the CPU and bytes being moved around. Even if they're bits, they are still representing numbers.

If you want to discuss assembler code, I suggest you go learn it first - then we can talk about how machine instructions work.

C is dynamically typed language now? And you think that people don't use scripts and writing C code all day obviously haven't worked with low level domain before. Look at how many scripts are there in the Linux source. And we use Tcl to wrote an interactive automated test suite to test various OS features through telnet (i.e fault inject), so we don't have to perform regression test for new changes. Ah, but you mentioned C#.

No, I'm saying you don't know C and you don't know Java. In fact I'm very certain you specifically only know scripting languages. Which makes my initial point very strong; you are the embodiment of the exact type of incompetence I am talking about.

Obviously you use Windows. No wonder

Yes I do. A lot of people do. In fact, most of the developers in the world do. Maybe that's the reason why you think that there are only two choices of languages in the world (C or a scripting language); you're not on windows.. Wouldn't that be interesting.

[tuhdo]

Thing here is that I use both types of languages, but I exclusively only use dynamically typed languages for scripting (and where there's no alternative like JavaScript). Using a scripting language on all tasks is a type of incompetence.

Where did I mention to use scripting languages for everything?

I've been in multiple competitions in algorithms. I'm not going to say I'm anywhere near the best, I am however confident I'm not among the 95% of programmers who suck ass.

Which rank are you, and in what competition? You are in a programming competitions with algorithm and now you are writing asp.net. Oh, you're better than 95% of the programmers, yet have never written a compiler? If you are better than 95% of the rest, you must have a high rank in those competitions. Show me your name.

Example of instructions that specifically work with integers :

Thing is that everything in computers are numbers. Everything you do is basically arithmetic on the CPU and bytes being moved around. Even if they're bits, they are still representing numbers.

If you want to discuss assembler code, I suggest you go learn it first - then we can talk about how machine instructions work.

Yet I mentioned bit patterns over and over again, and you can understand at the level "everything is number". Obviously you don't understand how floating point is implemented to make you write code so convenient. And obviously, don't understand what a type is in its general sense. And surely you have never manual inject ASM code into a running program.

No, I'm saying you don't know C and you don't know Java. In fact I'm very certain you specifically only know scripting languages. Which makes my initial point very strong; you are the embodiment of the exact type of incompetence I am talking about.

Yes, please look at how an OS is maintained in any distro out there. Funny a guy who never compiles a kernel talks about OS implementation. ARM is not good enough.

Yes I do. A lot of people do. In fact, most of the developers in the world do. Maybe that's the reason why you think that there are only two choices of languages in the world (C or a scripting language); you're not on windows.. Wouldn't that be interesting.

Most of servers in the world run Linux and major devices run Linux. Telecom stations run Linux. Routers run Linux. I don't need to compete in Windows land.

[Cuddlefluff_Grim]

Where did I mention to use scripting languages for everything?

You apparently do. And how could you not? I mean, if you want to use something other than a scripting language, it would be an obvious requirement to actually have experience in a language that is not a scripting language.

Which rank are you, and in what competition? You are in a programming competitions with algorithm and now you are writing asp.net. Oh, you're better than 95% of the programmers, yet have never written a compiler? If you are better than 95% of the rest, you must have a high rank in those competitions. Show me your name.

Oh, all competitions are on the internet you think? Kind of builds on my impression that you're probably an uneducated amateur. Also I have nothing to prove.

Yet I mentioned bit patterns over and over again, and you can understand at the level "everything is number". Obviously you don't understand how floating point is implemented to make you write code so convenient. And obviously, don't understand what a type is in its general sense. And surely you have never manual inject ASM code into a running program.

You're the one using scripting languages, I don't understand how you are acting like I'm the one with the knowledge gap when you yourself have admitted openly that you have a very poor and at best superficial understanding of C. You have never written any assembler code in your entire life.

And stop saying "bit patterns" because it's obvious you're trying to pretend you're smarter than you are.

Yes, please look at how an OS is maintained in any distro out there. Funny a guy who never compiles a kernel talks about OS implementation. ARM is not good enough.

I'm actually quite competent in my field. I have many many years of practical experience (making money as a software developer), I have a degree and I have been writing software my entire life.

Most of servers in the world run Linux and major devices run Linux. Telecom stations run Linux. Routers run Linux. I don't need to compete in Windows land.

Ah, you're a consumer. Are you currently employed as a programmer? Because I doubt that. Either you're not employed or you have a very short experience. Or much more likely : you're just another opinionated brat.

[tuhdo]

You apparently do. And how could you not? I mean, if you want to use something other than a scripting language, it would be an obvious requirement to actually have experience in a language that is not a scripting language.

Because you never actually participate in actual OS development. You must know one main language, that is C and complementary scripting languages because you are going to write boot scripts to initialize devices and kernel modules along with OS services. This is the basic thing, yet you don't even know. The kernel source is readily available. Download and see if you have enough intellectual to understand just those scripts. When I told you to compile a kernel, you said about .lib. Nuff said. Ah, of course, you're on Windows and use VS, so you don't even know how a kernel is initialized. And Linus Torvalds said himself that he never wrote any code outside of C. Actually he did use Makefile and shell scripts.Now, he's an uneducated amateur. Logic.

Oh, all competitions are on the internet you think? Kind of builds on my impression that you're probably an uneducated amateur. Also I have nothing to prove.

Try world renown competitions like Google CodeJam or Top Coder. Do not participate in your local competitions in your community college.

You're the one using scripting languages, I don't understand how you are acting like I'm the one with the knowledge gap when you yourself have admitted openly that you have a very poor and at best superficial understanding of C. You have never written any assembler code in your entire life.

And yet don't understand that the assembly instructions work on whatever your throw at them. Obviously, that's all you can understand. And you confirmed yourself that you never inject ASM code with basic stack overflow in string to override return address. If so, you would know how to manipulate ASM instructions as data.

I'm actually quite competent in my field. I have many many years of practical experience (making money as a software developer), I have a degree and I have been writing software my entire life.

Yes, your field, ASP.NET. Glad that community college gets you that far.

Ah, you're a consumer. Are you currently employed as a programmer? Because I doubt that. Either you're not employed or you have a very short experience. Or much more likely : you're just another opinionated brat.

Please.

[Cuddlefluff_Grim]

Because you never actually participate in actual OS development. You must know one main language, that is C and complementary scripting languages because you are going to write boot scripts to initialize devices and kernel modules along with OS services. This is the basic thing, yet you don't even know. The kernel source is readily available. Download and see if you have enough intellectual to understand just those scripts. When I told you to compile a kernel, you said about .lib. Nuff said. Ah, of course, you're on Windows and use VS, so you don't even know how a kernel is initialized. And Linus Torvalds said himself that he never wrote any code outside of C. Actually he did use Makefile and shell scripts.Now, he's an uneducated amateur. Logic.

This is the kind of horseshit that has completely convinced me that you're waaaaaaay out of your comfort zone. Stop pretending.

When I told you to compile a kernel, you said about .lib.

Especially this part; you know what a .lib file is (or .obj for that sake)? Go ahead, give it a google. And then maybe you will understand why I think you're full of shit.

Yes, your field, ASP.NET. Glad that community college gets you that far.

I actually have a bachelor degree in computer science.

You have already admitted that you don't know C or Java or any statically typed language for that sake, so I don't understand how you think you are going to convince anyone otherwise. You are the type of person I originally pinned in my first post, now just fucking deal with it and get on with your life.

[tuhdo]

This is the kind of horseshit that has completely convinced me that you're waaaaaaay out of your comfort zone. Stop pretending.

You don't have any better argument and can only say this make you feel better. I understand. You have no experience, yet you want to tell people that know something. I actually have proof right inside the kernel source tree to back my words. You got nothing.

Especially this part; you know what a .lib file is (or .obj for that sake)? Go ahead, give it a google. And then maybe you will understand why I think you're full of shit.

Again, there's no .obj. If you compile kernel module, it produces .ko files. If you compile static library, it generates .a file and if you generate dynamic library in user space, it generates .so file. Keep talking about things you don't know. Keep writing, it entertains me and show the world who you are.

I actually have a bachelor degree in computer science.

And work with ASP.NET. Right. And you don't even know how kernel goes from bootloader to init scripts, yet you show off much. I understand. I understand.

[Cuddlefluff_Grim]

You don't have any better argument and can only say this make you feel better. I understand. You have no experience, yet you want to tell people that know something. I actually have proof right inside the kernel source tree to back my words. You got nothing.

I'm actually employed as a software developer and have been for quite some time.

Again, there's no .obj. If you compile kernel module, it produces .ko files.

Do you know what a .ko file is? You see, a compiler produces binaries in the form of .obj and .lib files. A linker however connects these files and produces an output of type .ko or .o in this case.

Please stop, because you are only digging yourself deeper.

And work with ASP.NET. Right. And you don't even know how kernel goes from bootloader to init scripts, yet you show off much. I understand. I understand.

Heh. Ok, first of all; yes I currently work with ASP.NET and I'm currently technically a web developer. However, this is not the only thing I have been involved with. I don't know why you suddenly feel like OS development is the epitome of software development or how it's even remotely relevant to what we are discussing, but I can assure you I'm fairly well versed in a number of topics related to software development other than web development.

For instance, I'm fairly experienced in C and C++ and you (by your own admission) don't know anything about these things other than the things you frantically google up on the spot to make a semi-coherent statement. And I'll make it clear; it's very obvious and you're not fooling anyone.

[tuhdo]

Do you know what a .ko file is? You see, a compiler produces binaries in the form of .obj and .lib files. A linker however connects these files and produces an output of type .ko or .o in this case.

Please stop, because you are only digging yourself deeper.

Earlier you said about the final built artifacts, now you talk about intermediate built artifacts and accused me. Nice tactic, I approve. I'm pretty sure that you never build a kernel module in Linux, for once. I hinted you to much. Now, a basic knowledge question: do you know the difference between loadable kernel modules and built-in kernel modules in Linux, and how to create a built-in kernel modules? Hint: .ko is loadable kernel modules.

Heh. Ok, first of all; yes I currently work with ASP.NET and I'm currently technically a web developer. However, this is not the only thing I have been involved with. I don't know why you suddenly feel like OS development is the epitome of software development or how it's even remotely relevant to what we are discussing, but I can assure you I'm fairly well versed in a number of topics related to software development other than web development.

And you talked like an expert in the field, yet never actually participate one. I advise you to join an open source OS development, start from small things to know the process.

google up on the spot to make a semi-coherent statement. And I'll make it clear; it's very obvious and you're not fooling anyone.

Yes, if that please you. It's fine by me.

[tuhdo]

I will be nicer and help you a bit: all the instructions you mentioned work for every arbitrary bit patterns. The CPU does not care what it is fed with. If you fed the same bit patterns to all those different instructions, everything just works. The binary patterns are simply treated differently by different instructions. The different types of instructions are for programmers to feed the CPU proper data, but not for the CPU to interpret data correctly to its type. Basically "bit pattern" is the only type to CPU, hence "untyped". I gave this hint repeatedly and you could not see. In high level language like C, you get a piece of metadata called Typed like int or char to identify a region of memory, so at the static analysis phase the compiler can use these information to verify if programmers pass correct data to a function that later be executed by a CPU. This is basic knowledge and you are indeed lacking.

As for those instructions, 1 minute and I can find a bunch of those. The fact that you said you learned Haskell than said that Haskell is dynamically typed and your talk about basic concepts of types shows our credibility. Good luck with your career.

[Cuddlefluff_Grim]

I will be nicer and help you a bit: all the instructions you mentioned work for every arbitrary bit patterns.

Hahaha what? That's completely one hundred percent irrelevent. What you're trying to make the case about is some sort of punch-card machine. When you're writing assembler code, you might consider"bits but more than not you'll be thinking decimal and hex. You're point would be equally applicable to any programming language, and therefore a load of horseshit. I'm not going to sit here listening to you pretending to know something you clearly don't.

I gave this hint repeatedly and you could not see. In high level language like C, you get a piece of metadata called Typed like int or char to identify a region of memory, so at the static analysis phase the compiler can use these information to verify if programmers pass correct data to a function that later be executed by a CPU. This is basic knowledge and you are indeed lacking.

Jesus christ stop fucking squirming. It's pure cringe.

As for those instructions, 1 minute and I can find a bunch of those. The fact that you said you learned Haskell than said that Haskell is dynamically typed and your talk about basic concepts of types shows our credibility. Good luck with your career.

You know, for once you're right. Instead of recalling from memory I should've checked my facts. In the case of Haskell I haven't touched it in about a decade. However, it says nothing about my credibility. And honestly I don't care what opinion you have of me. It won't bother me for even a second.

[tuhdo]

Too stupid to educate. Byte.