/prog/ - Programming

>>3589

Oh, same. That drives me bonkers.

I like scheme's approach to that, in that literally the only false value is #f. It's helpful that 0 is not false when dealing with array/list indices. I can do things like this:

(and-let* ((index (search-vector-blah-blah-blah vect something)))
  ;; and this code will still run if index is 0, but not if index is #f (false)
  (do-something-with-index vect index))

I hate whatever Javascript does with strings and numbers and them being freely convertible between the two types.

I don't know where I stand on Javascript. It brought some pretty solid features to the mainstream, but then it's got lots of weird warts to work around.

Why is it excusable in C?

Hate dynamic typing and languages without sum types. It's pathetic. No Option/Maybe time in the standard library? Into the garbage.

I don't hate any features of any language. That's pointless. Just pick a language you like, and do your shit. That feature you "hate" is probably irrelevant to the big picture.

I do however "hate" the whole programming culture. They are all so arrogant, but the effects just aren't there. How many people work on software that you use every day? And it's all shit. Web browsers have been around for decades, and they are all shit. And of course they hate it when people criticize their software, or make them jump through hoops before they can do so. What, are you such a special snowflake that you get to insult people because they dared to suggest a feature, or report a bug "wrong" ? Fuck you then. Programming needs more humanity.

What else do I "hate"? The people act like you have to spend years doing banal shit before you can actually get stuff done. You don't need their special language to start programming. You don't need advanced math. You don't need to know what "github" is. You just need to get in and do stuff.

>>3705

Because C is a step above portable assembler, so a conditional there is often little more than an abstraction of a test against zero anyway.

>>3589

>fucking hate falsiness

>null should be falsy

I hate gets() and scanf(). In CURRENT_YEAR, these libc functions should do nothing but cause a compile-time error, telling you to use shit that isn't fundamentally insecure (in the case of gets) or fundamentally incapable of interacting reasonably with a user (in the case of scanf). Read in lines at a time, into buffers that can contain those lines, and use sscanf() on read lines if you really want that shit.

I hate how every 'modern' 'advanced' 'high-level' programming language is stuck in the 90s. The Linux kernel continues to advance. It has all kinds of cool system calls. You can do shit like swap the names of two files without a race condition. But fuck it, Windows doesn't have that, and it wasn't portable among unices back in 1995.

oops that second one wasn't a future.

Replacement hate: laziness.

It is the solution for literally nothing, but it introduces all kinds of problems of its own.

>>3722

Null being falsy is unambiguous in almost every case.

>waah waah languages arent 100% theoretically correct

Fucking pretentious losers in this thread, what have you accomplished besides bitching?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_law_of_triviality

Go and write something more complex than "hello world" to have some weight behind your words before you act like a software god. Your code probably runs like shit, and that's not because gets() and scanf() suck, >>3722

>>3728

I'm a professional programmer who has to use dozens of languages through work; you get a long list of things to hate when you have to use tons of different languages in codebases written by other people.

Why are you afraid that people might actually learn something and improve?

You can't really invoke Parkinson's Law of Triviality here, given that what we're talking about are basic programming features that affect every aspect of the language. That's the opposite of the Law of Triviality.