/prog/ - Programming

Clearly you have no knowledge of unix. Unix-coders have found these methods working, so why wouldn't they use them?

Windows/OSX is clearly meant for end-users who need graphical feedback in form of icons etc. to navigate/use the system efficiently.

Unix users don't, as command line is faster when you know what you're looking for and where.

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/Biculturalism.html

>>2739

I think these methods have been proven to be effective as they're still in use. If there was more efficient way to write e.g. kernel code, most of the devs probably would use it.

For the second time, you don't see to have much experience with unix as your claims are pretty ridiculous.

In windows there are many tools to help developing stuff like IDEs and such and they fit well for windows needs, not necessarily for unix.

I think in windows if you know where specific files is, you're more likely going to write it to explorer's url bar and get autocompletion instead if clicking through several folders.

This is because you know where the files is and it's faster to go there by typing the address

>>2730

Symptoms of OP:

>Does everything in Xcode.

>Doesn't want to / can't learn emacs because lisp is scary and they didn't cover it in CS101

>Thinks swift is cool

>Sucks steve jobs' cancerous dead cock

>>2758

>wrong

>wrong

>wrong

>wrong

How does it feel to be wrong? Must be normal to you.

>>2759

Actually I'm starting to see a pattern, that linuxfags are always wrong about everything.

Added to the symptoms.

> Thinks a Emacs is a waste of time instead of a time-saver.

> Thinks C programmers don't know about abstraction.

OP is dumbfag cancer

>>2762

You don't really know what IDE and abstraction means, do you?

Another symptom of linuxfaggorty is "being stuck in the 70's".

Since back then those concepts didn't exist I could understand why you're so confused.

>>2767

It looks like you're the one being confused. If you had actually ever used unix environment for development, you'd know these tools and methods work like charm there.

Only people who complain about abstraction are windows developers who can't understand that there are many kinds of abstractions, not only an IDE with buttons.

If you need an IDE to maximize your productivity, that's okay but unix doesn't need you nor your contributions.

Insteand you have a place in Windows developer community with curryniggers and java babbies

>>2769

Thanks for confirming you have no idea what abstraction is, thus proving me right.

Also Unix isn't a magical unicorn. While most if its developers are "special" it isn't special, it's just an OS running on the same hardware in general.

So doing things in the most inefficient manner isn't a requirement, but a choice.

>>2771

>inefficient

Prove it. Prove that using a mouse is faster than using emacs. From experience, it's the opposite.

>>2767

>Since back then those concepts didn't exist I could understand why you're so confused.

>Abstraction didn't exist before the 70s

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

That word doesn't mean what you think it means. Come, define it, and give me another laugh.

>>2775

GUI != mouse.

In Windows you can type in the initial letters of a folder or file to select it and then press enter to open it.

In most cases 2 keystrokes, initial letter + enter, will be enough.

That's just one example. GUI's purpose is to make things faster and easier to use.

I assume your experience doesn't amount to much.

>>2776

I don't know if you ever heard about this website called "Google" (maybe because it was created in th 90's), but if you were to use it to sreach for "Abstraction" you could find this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstraction_(computer_science)

>>2778

Two keystrokes in most cases?

The first key is the windows key

The second key is the first letter

And you have acomplished nothing.

How the fuck is this any different from a console? Surely you have another example to prove using the mouse is better.

You still haven't defined abstraction. You claim that it was only developed recently, and that older programmers don't know about it, but that is absolute bullshit. A god damn electrician makes use of abstraction. Every single programmer uses abstraction. To act as if it is some sort of modern technological advancement is bullshit; it implies you do not know what you are talking about. So, once again, define abstraction instead of posting a link.

>>2781

>>2778

>Didn't discover the concept of abstraction. Still writes code in C.

You think abstraction does not happen in C. You are retarded. If you aren't dealing with machine code, registers ,and circuits (and even they use abstraction) you are already making use of abstraction.

>>2771

It's exactly a choice, and do you know why unix devs tend to make this choice?

Because it's the most efficient way of doing this inside unix. Fast, simple and customizable.

>>2730

"objectively, measurably"

Get back to your home work or you'll fail your unix class.

Instead of approaching a system from the standpoint that it's wrong, maybe, I don't know, just try learning it and adapting to its ways?

Old technologies are still in place for good reason, they won. They work very well and are stable, no matter what your professors and peers say.

I standardized against "old" technologies C/C++/php and unix and I have never had to retool to get a new job and make top dollar.

Better yet I don't have to work with retards who are too dumb and unapplied to use these amazing technologies.

You may call it bait, but all the defenders here know it's true that they're using flint stones while smarter people got plasma torches.

The jelly is strong.

>>2954

>>2955

Man VS2015's debugger is so damn sweet I can't even hold myself.

del