How can the best programming language in existence fall so hard?

http://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/

File: 1483105838560.jpg (96KB, 800x1119px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 800x1119px

>>58253879

>>58253898
>No dick
>>58253879
Trends and some other language will replace it soon
I bet on Python

>>58253993
>Implying python or any other language will start to replace C in creating operating systems.

>When even Assembly is a more widely used language than yours.

I wonder why Perl is failing so badly.

>>58253879
What's so good about java anyway?

>>58254529
Nothing

>>58253882
This is a company which takes money to let people know that their code is good. Where did you even hear about them?

>>58254529
Its Pajeet's choice.

>tfw php programmer

feels pretty comfy.

File: typical javatard.png (60KB, 782x522px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 782x522px

>>58253879
Too many retards majoring in CS and only knowing Java.

>>58254628
<<

>>58254628
That's okay if they are beginners and don't know about floating point arithmetics. No reason to be rustled

>>58254641
what's that supposed to do

File: 1468703306758s.jpg (3KB, 125x93px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 125x93px

>>58254651
it's just all sort of levels of retarded is the thing, first of all why don't they multiply by .01 and secondly why the fuck are they using a for loop

>>58254049
It got replaced by python/powershell for sysadmins
Wasn't updated in a long time.
Perl 6 is nothing like Perl 5
Perl is obtuse as fuck for beginners
Perl is obtuse as fuck for experienced programmers

>>58254651
the bigger problem is creating a loop to multiply x twice, instead of multiplying it by 0.01

So... Java is the most important programming language out there and everything else is thrash?

what context is that grap in?

>>58254732
It's basically a popularity contest:
>The TIOBE Programming Community index is an indicator of the popularity of programming languages. The index is updated once a month. The ratings are based on the number of skilled engineers world-wide, courses and third party vendors. Popular search engines such as Google, Bing, Yahoo!, Wikipedia, Amazon, YouTube and Baidu are used to calculate the ratings. It is important to note that the TIOBE index is not about the best programming language or the language in which most lines of code have been written.

More detail: http://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/programming-languages-definition/

>>58253879
assembly is making a comeback because household electronics.

>>58253879
>C and Assembly become ancient wizard knowledge once the Old Guard of the 70s dies out
>High school kids today grow up on Python
>By the year 2050, nobody knows how computers work, but the whole world depends on them
>The remaining wizards who seek the forgotten arcane knowledge of the Old Ones get paid $300k starting because they're the only ones left in humanity who can debug a stripped binary

>>58253879
Because Go have replaced C

>>58254897

At the physics department here they still teach C as an introductory language, I'm glad it was the first language I learned. Fast as hell for all kinds of simulations, can't imagine doing the same stuff in Java or some shit, although python is better.

>>58254962
>although python is better.

The reason why the scientific python libraries often almost are as fast as C (but easier to program) is because it often is just a wrapper for stuff written in C. (numpy for example or even matplotlib if I am not mistaken)

In the same way that matlab is based on Fortran

>The index is calculated from the number of search engine results for queries containing the name of the language.

what? it proves nothing

>>58253879

It's an era of webdevs and shitty mobile apps, C was simply made for other purposes and for audience other than your average hipster "coder" who doesn't really like math.

>>58253879
>assembly language
what they mean by this ? all of them ?

>>58253879
>http://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/
>Rust
>0.316%
ahahah-animegirl.bmp

>>58254694
Perl is still the best language for text manipulation the regex is great

Probably they changed how they parse the search data and this is just closer to the truth than it was before. Their methodology is broken as fuck anyway.

>>58254641
How about just writing 12.34 in the code?

>>58254989
Usually it's Fortran not C since they inevitably end up in some pre-compiled BLAS routines.

They're rarely "as fast as C" unless you're talking about useless 3 line examples and ridiculously inflexible.

>>58255309
many other languages have regex these days, like python.

>>58255352
Doesn't mean you should use it for regex, rather use awk and sed or perl instead of python.

>>58253879
Same reason why there is only a handful of people that know QED and god tier math

>its because rest of humans are brainlets

>>58253879
I don't see C++ falling anywhere in that graph

File: ohshitama.png (125KB, 735x422px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 735x422px

>>58253879
>All the languages are in decline

>Perl only language on the rise
1776 will commence again

>>58254692
We don't know the full context of the question.

Sure that looks retarded as fuck, but there's a good chance that guy removed a lot of code and only kept the core of the problem.

>>58255487
That's probably because some "uncharted" language is rising in popularity.

>>58255487
>>58255538
>inb4 Go

File: 12134213123213.gif (392KB, 371x209px) Image search: [Google]

392KB, 371x209px

>java

>>58255520
Php is the only one on the rise according to the graph

>>58255592
>What is assembly

>>58255522
>there's a good reason to do a for loop to multiply by .1 instead of just dividing by 100
No there isn't.

>>58253879
>C++ and C# btfo

People have been saying that C will be replaced for 30 years.

Pretty sure it can last another 30 years.

>>58255656
He may be trying to make a function to multiply by 10^-x and just picked out a specific example where the precision problem showed itself.

>>58254694
You forgot:
When there are updates there is little improvement to the language, yet it often breaks backward compability. It's basically in legacy mode, but without the stability.

>>58255309
Too bad text manipulation by regex isn't the only task. And even loading a file to a variable is so broken that you need to install File::Slurp and then even that is a piece of shit blogs.perl.org/users/leon_timmermans/2015/08/fileslurp-is-broken-and-wrong.html and it's all like JS from here.

>>58255411
>implying regexes are such an important task that they require a special tool
>implying regexes should be that complicated that Pythons implementation can't do them

>>58256001
Python has a painfully slow regex implementation, as does Perl, Ruby, and most meme scripting languages.
awk, sed, grep and all that are lightning fast.

>>58256017
If you need your regex to be fast, you are doing something wrong.
Same applies to interpreters.

We need to rally!

>>58256219
I'm talking about about it taking 500 years while grep and friends would do it in milliseconds.

>>58253879
>How can the best programming language in existence fall so hard?

Assembly is rising as far as i can see.
So you are incorrect OP.

>>58256259
Maybe pushing 2 gigs of text with a 100 line match through a regex instead of a specialized parser isn't such a good idea.

>>58256294
It's actually a point about the algorithm used to implement the regex.
The one used in Python, Perl etc. scales exponentially, while grep and that scale quadratically.
https://swtch.com/~rsc/regexp/regexp1.html
There is a nice chart about 2/3 the way down the page.

>>58256336
I know, right? Just use a real parser for something longer than 50 chars, as you should anyway.

>>58256350
You completely missed the point.

>>58256357
(You) completely missed the point.

>>58254529
It's very powerfull and verbose, meaning even a retard cant do uncomprehensible code.

I'm not an expert, but since a rise in Java is happening at the same time, I'd like to blame Indians.

File: 1465494040381.jpg (619KB, 1249x1727px) Image search: [Google]

619KB, 1249x1727px

>>58253879
>>58256262

This guy coded by himself Transport Tycoon and Rollercoaster Tycoon in Assembly, defining the business sim genre. Legend. Chris Sawyer.

>>58256001
>>58255984
Python shills go away.

There is more then that bloated language
>import shills

>Java barely impacted by explosion of Android devices

>>58256336
>https://swtch.com/~rsc/regexp/regexp1.html
If I understand, I should drop Perl regex system to C NFA structures ?

File: 1471906109212.jpg (94KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 960x720px

>>58254692
>saving the thumbnail

>>58254033
>Implying that creating operating system is the most important thing to do with programming

>>58256420

isn't that amazing

there was a time when everything was written in assembly

>>58256482

python is slow at run time but fast to write

it's more of a productivity tool, kind of like excel

>>58255722
C will stick around for as long as computers exist.

>>58254529
Was good until C# came out and Java got purchased by oracle.

>>58254049
1) College students learn Assembly so there's a lot of stupid questions posted about it
2) Perl has been largely replaced by Python for simple scripting tasks
3) Perl 6 is not compatible with Perl 5
4) Well written Perl code is often incredibly fucking hard to decipher to people who aren't used to it

>>58257997
Indexer? Is that you?

>>58254692
It's actually a really good question. The issue he's asking about isn't loop or the added precision, its the actual arithmetic error introduced by the fact 0.1 isn't representable in IEEE floating point.

Actually I bet the loop was an attempt to mitigate that issue.

>>58253879
I love C but why is it so fucking high on this chart?

>>58257997

What did you expect from this normie filled chan?

>>58261829

The only true comment in this entire thread.

>>58262071
Because it's essentially "how often people google for C".

>>58254529
It has a large body of programmers. That's it. Companies will continue to use it because they're able to easily swap out programmers whenever they want, which keeps their programmer salaries relatively low. That also makes it desirable to know for some programmers because there's lots of other jobs they can take if they're unhappy with the one they have, or if they lose it.

It's a more than acceptable tradeoff between people who were never really passionate about programming but could do it and want something safe, and companies that don't really care about programming and just want something usable in the end.

>>58261829
If only because of the humongous amount of code that is already written in C and will have to be maintained.

From a system's programming capability perspective, you only need the target platform's instruction set, and the system call interface if you're sitting on top of the OS. Only reason most modern languages like Python don't fit in is they define their own virtualized environment. The code can't talk to the host at all without magical features like FFI.

>>58262137
C is the only portable language that works exactly like an actual computer. Without it, there would be no way to write portable drivers and operating systems. As long as there are programmers, they will be writing C.

>>58253898
thank you.

>>58254049
Python is pretty much Perl 2.0, it does everything in a simpler fashion and with no downsides.

The only reason to use Perl now is for regexes.

>>58262118
>That's it

Not really. Java has a virtual machine implementation that is among the best available today and a ridiculous amount of code already written and debugged that you can leverage. An implementation that's now hosting a ridiculous amount of new, better languages that can interoperate with that code.

Java as a language is evolving too, having gained many functional programming features recently. Not at the rate of C#, but still.

>>58262158
>C is the only portable language that works exactly like an actual computer.

? It doesn't work "like a real computer" at all. The entirety of C is backed by an abstract machine, not unlike the virtual machines in other languages. High-level language constructs such as "if" are entirely non-existent in hardware, and a lot of hardware features simply don't exist in C. It works exactly the same way as any other language does. You need totally magic bits to talk to the operating system via system calls, not unlike the magic involved in the foreign interface mechanisms of virtual machines.

>>58253879
You can't do much in pure C other than kernel development and alike.

It's a meme language now.

>>58253879
Notice how all lower languages rise at the same moment when C and Java start to fall.

People are just discovering other languages.
That's a good thing.

Notice how C++ lost 2/3 of its popularity.

>>58254903
and C++, and Java, and...

File: 1473525311822.png (51KB, 169x200px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 169x200px

>>58262421
>>58262450

>>58262298
>? It doesn't work "like a real computer" at all.
you know that "if" is not the only way to use this instruction in C, right?

>>58254903
Go replaced scripting languages. It'll replace C when the vast amount of software written in C is somehow converted to Go. Until then, you're stuck with cgo.

>>58262475
Of course. It was just a simple example. Nearly every language feature of C has no direct hardware correspondent. I say "nearly" because numbers are a feature of C and they're underspecified enough for there to be a direct match.

>>58262514
C was made to be more readable than ASM but it's pretty much just one step above. most functions in C are no more than 10 machine instructions and some (basic) go as low as one instruction. if you wanted, you could write code in C just like you'd do in assembler

>>58262580
"Pretty much just one step above" is still not "like a real computer".

C fails to reify any hardware concept within the language itself. Any hardware magic gets implemented in assembly and called from C, making it no better than any other language.

Also, you have to rely on the optimizer to figure out the best way to map your program's semantics to the hardware's. It's not different in any way from virtual machines with JIT compilers and intermediate representations. High level language functions can and often are optimized just as well. Clang proves it.

>>58262318
You can do whatever you want, the libraries exist, the compilers exist, the language is fast enough for any task you care to think of. It's not a question of what you can do, but rather of what you should do.

>google search == language popularity

>>58262580
linus plz

>>58262298
>a ridiculous amount of code already written and debugged that you can leverage
>hosting a ridiculous amount of new, better languages that can interoperate with that code

The libraries already written plays into reducing costs/having programmers be highly interchangeable and that those new languages will probably see huge adoption rates when companies see a large enough pool of developers to start using them in the same way that they use java devs as cheaper, replaceable parts now.

From what I've seen, read, and from the short time I spent as a java dev, the more interesting features that java's picked up since java 6 have very much felt like "me too" features, to keep those somewhat more engaged programmers using the language.

>>58262017
we aren't critiquing the question, (which is honestly answerable through 5 seconds of google so it isn't a good question) but his retarded implementation.

>>58263137
how's any of that bad

>>58262740
instructions in C are called instructions for a reason

>>58263739
The C standard defines no such thing as an "instruction". They're implementation details. You can interpret C if you want. They're only briefly mentioned briefly, a meta level, in the context of floating point math and signals.

>>58263846
i just said that C can do instructions just like assembler. how it's named, it doesn't matter for the computer

>>58253879
>assembly
>going up in 2k16
Wut?

>>58260399
>there was a time when everything was written in assembly
Yes, but that wasn't it.
He also used a bit of C to hook to the Win32 functions.

>>58254641
>bit shifting a floating point value
ISHYGDDT

>>58258522
>implying that creating operating system isn't what C is for

>>58263978
You don't need C to call win32 functions from ASM

>>58263954

It's the compiler that can do inline assembly, not C. The language itself has no such facility. Like pragmas, it's inherently unportable, even between compilers.

>>58263998
i'm not talking about inline assembly. i'm talking about basic things such as adding or moving a pointer which are basically machine instructions

>>58264028
They may be. Or they might not. C doesn't define it. Just because many compilers do it that way doesn't mean its how C works.

File: 1472516292639.png (566KB, 1000x352px) Image search: [Google]

566KB, 1000x352px

>>58253879
REMINDER

>>58264048
only a complete idiot would do anything more complicated than a single machine instruction for such basic things

>>58255984
>And even loading a file to a variable is so broken
What makes you say that? Its a little antiquated the way its done but it isn't "broken".

Also File::Slurp isn't really the preferred way to do things these days. Perl is starting to suffer from the same issue PHP does as of recent: outdated tutorials and examples. I don't think either language will really overcome this issue. At least Perl got rid of CGI.pm forcing people to migrate to things like PSGI/Plack which has less crusty documentation to refer to

>>58254049
PHP was more convenient in the mid-2000s on shared cpanel hosts. Ironically cpanel is written in Perl despite being a huge part of what killed its usage on the web.

Perl is still pretty huge in Japan though, which is nice since I'm a huge weeb

>>58253879
Pajeet can't into C. So we use meme languages that Pajeet can sort of understand.

Pajeets on the rise

>>58263982
why not bitshift?

>fail
Not the way you should view this.
The amount of people writing software is increasing. At the same time educators are failing to teach them basic programming.
Since you can't Google for solutions to most problems in C you get a lot less banana fly programmers sticking to the sweet surface of C.
Only real code monkeys peel it beautifully and eat it.

And there's nothing wrong with being a language which isnt broadly used.
C certainly isn't a convenient language for a lot of tasks. It's just the most convenient (so far) for its very specific use.

Certainly not what I'd call a failure.

>>58254651
>its OK for beginners to not know one of the most basic types in computing
Not before they start trying to do anything using that thing.

Worse yet this person hasn't even asked about why it's not giving him the 'right' value. It's inexcusable. He's a dummy. Doesn't deserve an answer. But they will give him one. Because they're whores for their pointless points.

>>58254694
>Perl is obtuse as fuck for beginners
>Perl is obtuse as fuck for experienced programmers
"I think of Perl as checksummed line noise with a sense of purpose"

>>58264154
So? It still depends on the implementation, which is distinct from the language itself.