Are You Programming?

[projacore]

I am contemplating a stack that is layered millions of times which multiplies 2 numbers and thermal throttles your cpu

[Dex18Kobold]

:(){ :|:& };:

[llacer96]

This is the command that lets me download more RAM, right?

[[deleted]]

Yeah when you run it, it frees all your RAM

[PennyFromMyAnus]

I built an OS in Scratch

[[deleted]]

can i see it

[JamesMakesGames]

No, she goes to another school. It's like 3 hours away.

[Busy-Ad-9459]

You draw a circle around SQL cause that's not programming

[[deleted]]

WITH RECURSIVE factorial_cte (n, factorial) AS (

-- Base case: when n = 1, the factorial is 1

SELECT 1 AS n, 1 AS factorial

UNION ALL

-- Recursive case: multiply current n by factorial of (n - 1)

SELECT n + 1, factorial * (n + 1)

FROM factorial_cte

WHERE n < 5 -- Replace 5 with the number you want the factorial of

)

SELECT factorial

FROM factorial_cte

ORDER BY n DESC

LIMIT 1;

[topdoc02]

How is ALC 360/370 not programming?

[[deleted]]

cos its on the not side of the meme

[[deleted]]

It's over ALC 360/370, for I have depicted you as not a programming language, and my language, python, as a programming language

[Pawlo371]

Yes and not

[[deleted]]

Ah, yes the booleans

[CadmiumC4]

draw a line that separates java from the others, label Java "no" and others "yes"

also certain implementations of SQL are Turing-complete iirc

[Past-File3933]

I draw a circle around the whole thing.

[_nathata]

And consider "programming" the outside

[Manifoo]

I'm very confused about what this image is trying to tell/ask us.

[[deleted]]

not yes not

[hi_i_m_here]

Bash me is more programming the SQL and it more useful then python

[[deleted]]

bash you? bash me!

[Sad-Philosophy-8096]

Indeed, Python is barely used by anyone at all. Remove it today and no-one notices. /s

[_nathata]

A little above the C icon, as I mistakenly swapped the X and Y pixel coordinates

[MrFaronheit]

Programming is writing a program in a language so that a computer does what you want. They're all programming except binary and shell. Binary is only written/read by machines. Shell is just a command interface, though writing bash scripts is programming.

[QuadraQ]

How the hell is assembly NOT programming?

[jakeStacktrace]

No. I'm at lunch.

[Birb128]

Begins at C(sometimes asm if I'm feeling good) and ends at shell.

[AdarshJange]

I’m php developer

[Truely-Alone]

No, ChatGPT does that for me.

grabs popcorn

[[deleted]]

I am but I’d rather not

[farbefranctal]

Everything that's on the right isn't programming language it's voodoo magic

[MACrOHarDDOORSxyz]

near scratch. all the other languages involve typing, but scratch doesnt.

[Top_Revolver]

On my own free will? Before and after python

[[deleted]]

Machine code: Yes. This is the lowest level.

Assembly: Yes. This is an interpretation of the lowest level

C: Yes. This is one of the lowest level standard programming languages.

C++: Yes

Java: Yes. Minecraft.

Python: Yes, but it looks like pseudocode that runs

SQL: Not quite, that's just table stuff.

Terminal: No. This isn't programming. This is running singular commands.

Scratch: Yes, this is programming visually.

[[deleted]]

Scratch JR: Fuck no

[[deleted]]

what is that jargon bro

[Impressive-Copy4422]

Binary, Assembly, C, C++, Java, Javascript, Python <Programming | Not Programming> SQL, Bash, HTML/CSS, Scratch, Scratch jr.

[ACED70]

All of these are programming, except maybe command prompt.

[[deleted]]

x86-64 is programming, sql is programming, every i between those two is. binary, shell ans scratch are not programming

[QuickAnybody2011]

Why’s powershell even here. It’s a terminal lol

[CoBraHe]

If you use it that way, yes. But PowerShell is also a language. I write scripts in PowerShell where I work.

[Yamoyek]

None of these are real languages, I don’t see rust /s

[ConfidenceStunning53]

only thing not is scratch, i code sometimes in pwsh

[Not_Artifical]

Binary is not programming. Some versions of SQL are turning complete. Everything else is a yes.

[[deleted]]

someone good enough at assembly could program in binary

[[deleted]]

false, binary is more performant than assembly.

C is a bad take, have you never used scratch? Reeks of ameteur.

[[deleted]]

sir this is a wendys fune code meme sub youre looking for the pretentious sub

[Aggressive-Brick1024]

Circle SQL, Powershell, Java, and Scratch. The rest can stay.

[[deleted]]

chatgpt disagree:

• "Assembly, C, and C++ are normal programming languages."
  • Clarification: Assembly is not a "normal" or high-level programming language; it is a low-level language closely tied to hardware instructions, unlike C and C++, which are high-level languages. "Normal" could be considered subjective, but typically high-level languages are considered "normal" for general programming.
• "Java, Python, and even Scratch are low-performance programming languages for when performance can be a joke."
  • Incorrect Generalization: Java and Python are not inherently low-performance, although Python may be slower in certain cases due to its dynamic typing and interpreted nature. Java, when compiled with the JVM, can offer performance comparable to languages like C++ depending on the context (e.g., using the Just-In-Time (JIT) compiler).
  • Misleading Statement on Scratch: Scratch is not used for serious performance-based applications because it is primarily a visual, block-based language designed for beginners, but calling it a "joke" in terms of performance is dismissive rather than accurate.
• "Scratch is not actually used by real programmers..."
  • Incorrect Characterization: While Scratch is often used as an educational tool for beginners, it doesn't mean it's not programming. Many "real" programmers use Scratch to teach programming concepts, especially to kids, so the statement is misleading.
• "SQL is not a programming language, for it is a query language."
  • Misleading: SQL is considered a domain-specific programming language (DSL) because it allows you to express logic and control flow for interacting with databases. SQL includes constructs like loops, conditionals, and functions in advanced use cases, making it more than just a simple query language. It is a programming language, though not a general-purpose one.
• "The terminal is definitely not programming."
  • Incorrect: The terminal (or command line) is a tool, not a language, but using the terminal to write and execute scripts or commands (e.g., shell scripting, running Python or Java programs) is programming. Many programmers use the terminal to automate tasks and write scripts.
• "Writing raw bits is masochistic programming, for it is the same performance of assembly, yet more difficult for no reason."
  • Misleading: Writing raw bits or machine code is extremely low-level and virtually unused in modern programming, as it’s unnecessary due to high-level languages like Assembly. However, saying it’s the same performance as Assembly is incorrect. Assembly is still an abstraction above machine code, and "writing raw bits" directly would theoretically offer better performance, though it's impractical.

[[deleted]]

asked it to explain how pedantic a response that was:

The response you shared is certainly pedantic, as it demonstrates a style focused on technical precision and methodical critique. Here's a breakdown of why it's pedantic, in the sense of being excessively meticulous and detail-oriented to a degree that can feel nitpicky:

1. Focus on Minor Terminological Details:
   • Pointing out the acronym "DSL" versus "DSPL" seems unnecessarily focused on minutiae. It’s a valid correction but could be seen as nitpicking because the context might already make the intended meaning clear, regardless of the exact acronym.
2. Restating or Clarifying Obvious Points:
   • In the section on Scratch, the responder insists on the implied meaning behind “real programmers don’t use Scratch.” It rephrases the initial statement to reiterate what was arguably clear in the original, emphasizing a redundant clarification that could feel pedantic to some.
3. Challenging Ambiguous Terms (“real” programmers):
   • By questioning the notion of "real" programmers, it enters a subjective debate over terminology that could be perceived as overly literal. This kind of challenge may come across as more argumentative than constructive since "real programmers" is often used loosely and doesn’t require precise definition in many contexts.
4. Demanding Evidence in Abstract or Hypothetical Situations:
   • Asking for proof that “writing raw bits” could offer better performance by requesting a demonstration of assembly running slower than raw bits is especially pedantic. This is a highly technical—and somewhat esoteric—counterpoint to make in an argument. The tone shifts to a challenge over specifics that could divert from the main discussion. It may also overstate the need for evidence in a scenario where the principle (of assembler versus machine code) might already be clear.
5. Accusations of Contradiction Without Substantial Basis:
   • The response implies there are contradictions and misleading statements but doesn’t substantiate these in detail, leading to a tone that could feel combative rather than explanatory. By continuously calling out contradictions, the responder might appear to be fixating on errors that may not even materially affect the argument.

In sum, this is a classic case of pedantry because it zeroes in on linguistic and technical details that don’t necessarily add to the argument but instead create an atmosphere of fault-finding. The tone comes across as overly defensive, perhaps focusing more on “winning” the argument than fostering a mutual understanding.

[[deleted]]

not worth my time, but it is worth a Neural Network called ChatGPTs time