/prog/ - Programming (textboard)

[59 / 0 / ?]

[1114432805] Debugging is for idiots

Anonymous Mon 25 Apr 2005 16:45:00 No.821 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By:

If you used a real man's programming language like Lisp or ML then you would have no need for gdb and it's (false) friends.

Having to debug a program is (IMO) a sign of sloppiness and shows that what you've set out to do is beyond your intellectual capacity to bring to completion.

Anonymous

2

Anonymous Mon 25 Apr 2005 21:35:00 No.823 Report

Quoted By:

plz teach me in the lisp/ml ways of mercyless extermination of bugs, oh enlightened one!

Anonymous

3

Anonymous Mon 25 Apr 2005 23:03:00 No.824 Report

Quoted By:

mmmmm.... nope... debugging is not based only on logical errors, ANYONE can make a mistake writing some variable incorrectly or some function with a wrong declaration... or since when you see a person with perfect caligraphy or spelling skills? or tell me if you have compiled a LISP program that has missing ")" and you spend hours looking for it? STFU

Christy McJesus !DcbLlAZi7U

4

Christy McJesus !DcbLlAZi7U Tue 26 Apr 2005 02:16:00 No.828 Report

Quoted By:

>>1
hay troll buddy

Anonymous

5

Anonymous Tue 26 Apr 2005 09:51:00 No.829 Report

Quoted By:

i use my own combination of d and basic so i never make mistaeks cuz d is awesome and so am i

Anonymous

6

Anonymous ID:(sage) Thu 28 Apr 2005 02:48:00 No.836 Report

Quoted By:

>>1 is either a complete idiot, or a wannabie troll.

Anonymous

7

Anonymous Thu 28 Apr 2005 14:31:00 No.839 Report

Quoted By:

>>3
>>6

I see the need for debugging in your case - you can't even master the syntax of the English language.

Anonymous

8

Anonymous ID:(sage) Thu 28 Apr 2005 15:08:00 No.840 Report

Quoted By:

>>7 is either a complete idiot, or a wannabie troll.

(oh no! the commas!)

Anonymous

9

Anonymous Sun 01 May 2005 11:00:00 No.867 Report

Quoted By:

>>1
Never mind that in any software engineering development process, there is ALWAYS a debug/revision subprocess, iterative or not. Never mind that professional IDEs always have a way to create debug builds. Never mind that companies spend millions of dollars on hiring test engineers to design and execute unit testing on code to debug it. Never mind that corporations stake their existance on using and releasing testing suites year after year after year.

Go back to writing your "Hello, World!" programs and STFU.

Anonymous

10

Anonymous Sun 01 May 2005 17:22:00 No.870 Report

Quoted By:

People also like to use Java and Windows, and more generally people also like to murder, rape, start wars and believe that a two housand year old Jew on a stick is a God. And then there are people like you who use argumentum ad populum.

Anonymous

11

Anonymous Mon 02 May 2005 09:31:00 No.874 Report

Quoted By:

That's one way to look at it. The other way is to note that those tools are tested and understood. They may not be perfect languages, but more factors need to be considered in the selection of a language than beauty alone.

Which doesn't change that >>1 is both a fucktard and a troll. You have to debug ML and other functional languages too. You do get rid of a large set of bugs and errors, but not all of them.

Anonymous

12

Anonymous Sun 29 May 2005 07:40:00 No.993 Report

Quoted By:

People who have erasers on their pencils are stupid. Anyone who ever needs to erase anything they write down is obviously so stupid that they should never be allowed to write again.

Anonymous

13

Anonymous Sun 29 May 2005 14:42:00 No.994 Report

Quoted By:

>>12

Invalid analogy.

Anonymous

14

Anonymous Mon 30 May 2005 02:48:00 No.996 Report

Quoted By:

Debugging involves design bugs, not just programming bugs, no?

Anonymous

15

Anonymous ID:(sage) Mon 30 May 2005 12:21:00 No.997 Report

Quoted By:

>>14
don't feed >>1

Anonymous

16

Anonymous ID:(sage) Mon 30 May 2005 16:12:00 No.998 Report

Quoted By:

>>1

You need to improve your trolling skills. Any serious application is subject to have bugs in any language it's written - say you have two bools, user and luser, and have to do stuff like (pseudocode):

if (user)
display "Command incorrect"
else if (luser)
display "Call somebody who knows"

You can easily mess with user and luser in any language, any way this is done.

Anonymous

17

Anonymous Tue 31 May 2005 09:05:00 No.1007 Report

Quoted By:

>>16

Only if you're a dyslexic idiot.

Anonymous

18

Anonymous ID:(sage) Tue 31 May 2005 12:16:00 No.1008 Report

Quoted By:

>>17 is quite obviously an experienced developer.

Anonymous

19

Anonymous ID:(sage) Tue 31 May 2005 13:32:00 No.1010 Report

Quoted By:

Yeah, doesn't look like he wrote anything larger than a hundred lines.

Anonymous

20

Anonymous Wed 01 Jun 2005 09:15:00 No.1014 Report

Quoted By:

>>12

Debugging is akin to a professional writer using the MSWord grammar tool (or whatever) to fix his novel.

Anonymous

21

Anonymous Wed 01 Jun 2005 11:51:00 No.1015 Report

Quoted By:

>>20
Comparing writing to programming doesn't speak well of yourself.

This is such a blatant troll, nobody can defend that being a serious developer.

Anonymous

22

Anonymous ID:(sage) Wed 01 Jun 2005 12:40:00 No.1016 Report

Quoted By:

shit sux saged dammit

Christy McJesus !DcbLlAZi7U

23

Christy McJesus !DcbLlAZi7U ID:(sage) Wed 01 Jun 2005 18:56:00 No.1017 Report

Quoted By:

>>20

No because grammar is syntax. Bugs aren't syntax errors, they're semantic errors. This thread is comedy.

Anonymous

24

Anonymous Thu 02 Jun 2005 00:01:00 No.1019 Report

Quoted By:

>>23
Semantic errors could be compared to plot holes, right?

Anonymous

25

Anonymous ID:(sage) Thu 02 Jun 2005 12:15:00 No.1021 Report

Quoted By:

sage fucker, do you speak it?

Anonymous

26

Anonymous Thu 02 Jun 2005 14:12:00 No.1023 Report

Quoted By:

>>23

Go back to your Visual Basic .Net and leave the talking to the real men.

Anonymous

27

Anonymous ID:(sage) Thu 02 Jun 2005 14:38:00 No.1024 Report

Quoted By:

>>26
Go back to your AOL and leave the trolling to the real men.

Anonymous

28

Anonymous ID:(sage) Fri 03 Jun 2005 11:58:00 No.1025 Report

Quoted By:

I'll second Anonymous-san #25.

Anonymous

29

Anonymous ID:(sage) Sat 18 Jun 2005 11:23:00 No.1121 Report

Quoted By:

When I'm the Jesus of programming, I'll follow your lead.

Anonymous

30

Anonymous Wed 03 Oct 2007 17:23:00 No.66404 Report

Quoted By:

THIS THREAD IS AWESOME!

Anonymous

31

Anonymous Wed 03 Oct 2007 18:27:00 No.66423 Report

Quoted By:

A proper language, proper skill, proper IDE with proper syntax highlighting and unit testing = reasonably bug free program.

Anonymous

32

Anonymous Wed 03 Oct 2007 19:27:00 No.66432 Report

Quoted By:

real man's programming language like Lisp or ML
More like a faggot language for people who can't debug so they spend all their time thinking and write the correct code in the first place... Oh wait...

Anonymous

33

Anonymous Wed 03 Oct 2007 19:32:00 No.66435 Report

Quoted By:

>>1
SML/NJ used to be distributed with a debugger. It was a pretty cool debugger because you could step it backwards as well as forwards.

Anonymous

34

Anonymous Thu 15 Jan 2009 19:19:00 No.177793 Report

Quoted By:

LISP

Anonymous

35

Anonymous Thu 15 Jan 2009 22:06:00 No.177817 Report

Quoted By:

>>3
or tell me if you have compiled a LISP program that has missing ")" and you spend hours looking for it?

That has never happened.

>>31
IDE
syntax highlighting
I loled. What does utter faggotry have to do with bugs?

Anonymous

36

Anonymous Thu 15 Jan 2009 22:25:00 No.177819 Report

Quoted By:

>>1
agreed. debugging should be illegal.

Anonymous

37

Anonymous Fri 16 Jan 2009 02:38:00 No.177845 Report

Quoted By:

I declare this thread the equivalent of those terrible YouTube shit videos. I shall call it a /prog/ dump

Anonymous

38

Anonymous Fri 17 Dec 2010 11:38:00 No.452855 Report

Quoted By:

Erika once told me that Xarn is a bad boyfriend

Anonymous

39

Anonymous Tue 28 Dec 2010 16:27:00 No.457337 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

40

Anonymous Thu 03 Feb 2011 14:40:00 No.481635 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

41

Anonymous Thu 03 Feb 2011 15:54:00 No.482094 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

42

Anonymous Wed 02 Jan 2013 09:26:00 No.827407 Report

Quoted By:

asd;
dsaf
geadg

Anonymous

43

Anonymous Tue 14 May 2013 03:01:00 No.878503 Report

Quoted By:

>>42
You think you are alone. You think that on the depths of page N-1 nobody can hear you scream.

But I can.

Anonymous

44

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2013 03:46:00 No.881533 Report

Quoted By:

CHECK MY ANUS

Anonymous

45

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2013 04:26:00 No.881537 Report

Quoted By:

If you don't want bugs in your program, why do you put them there?

Anonymous

46

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2013 04:48:00 No.881538 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

47

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2013 04:48:00 No.881539 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

48

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2013 04:48:00 No.881540 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

49

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2013 04:48:00 No.881541 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

50

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2013 04:48:00 No.881542 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

51

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2013 04:48:00 No.881543 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

52

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2013 07:10:00 No.881557 Report

Quoted By:

bhsghrghgfhdrymk

Anonymous

53

Anonymous Sat 31 Aug 2013 15:37:00 No.933731 Report

Quoted By:

In 1922, Adolf Fraenkel and Thoralf Skolem independently improved Zermelo's axiom system. The resulting 10 axiom system, now called Zermelo-Fraenkel axioms (ZF), is now the most commonly used system for axiomatic set theory.

Anonymous

54

Anonymous Sat 31 Aug 2013 16:22:00 No.933961 Report

Quoted By:

κ^{μ · ν} = (κ^μ)^ν.

Anonymous

55

Anonymous Sat 31 Aug 2013 17:07:00 No.934217 Report

Quoted By:

The structure of a fractal object is reiterated in its magnifications. Fractals can be magnified indefinitely without losing their structure and becoming "smooth"; they have infinite perimeters—some with infinite, and others with finite surface areas.

Anonymous

56

Anonymous Sat 31 Aug 2013 17:53:00 No.934448 Report

Quoted By:

Some basic sets of central importance are the empty set (the unique set containing no elements), the set of natural numbers, and the set of real numbers.

Anonymous

57

Anonymous Sat 31 Aug 2013 18:38:00 No.934651 Report

Quoted By:

In set theory and its applications throughout mathematics, a class is a collection of sets (or sometimes other mathematical objects) which can be unambiguously defined by a property that all its members share.

Anonymous

58

Anonymous Sat 31 Aug 2013 19:23:00 No.934848 Report

Quoted By:

The nature of the individual nonempty sets in the collection may make it possible to avoid the axiom of choice even for certain infinite collections. For example, suppose that each member of the collection X is a nonempty subset of the natural numbers.

Anonymous

59

Anonymous Wed 02 Apr 2014 00:24:00 No.958850 Report

Quoted By:

Very true.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches

[1114432805] Debugging is for idiots