Programming Languages

>>336903
>value
for learning you should learn C then c++
for money you should learn java

C is functional by design
c++/java are object oriented

you can find K&R and tc++pl, as well as standards (or final drafts) online

java documentation is abundant on the internet

>>336903
There's no value in learning very little about a bunch of languages. Stick to C++ and go in depth. Then branch out and learn other paradigms once you mature.

The next step after one semester of C++ would be to pick up a data structures and algorithms book in C++ and practice implementing what you read about.

>>336908
>C is functional by design
>c++/java are object oriented

C isn't functional, C++ isn't just OO. Stop mindlessly repeating shit you hear on /g/.

>>336903
I optimize game engines for a major company and honestly I've never programmed in Java. Learn C.

>>336903
Java is trash, only learn it if you want to do native Android shit (which you will regret).
c/c++ is important to know and you'll learn a lot about programming using it. I'ts harder to do a lot of things in it compared to Java.
However I'd recommend learning c#, its easier to learn and more powerful (and faster) than Java.

>>336931
>C isn't functional, C++ isn't just OO. Stop mindlessly repeating shit you hear on /g/.
0 reading comprehension

>>336966
Bleat all you want, there's no way the statement "C is functional" is anything but incorrect.

C is not functional, C is imperative.

Prolog is functional. LISP is functional. Ruby is functional. C is imperative; C is not functional.

>>336969
>Bleat all you want, there's no way the statement "C is functional" is anything but incorrect.
as I said 0 reading comprehension
>C is functional by design
>design

>angry
>cannot read
I guess you fresh out of /g/ summer programming course

>>337007
But it's not. It's imperative by design, and you were wrong.

I don't know why you keep defending this statement, when it's just wrong, and there's no spin you can put on it that makes it right.

Haskell is "functional by design". C is not "functional by design".

>>337020
it doesn't change the fact that you can't read though

>>336903
C. There's generally nothing you can't do in one language or the other, at a high level. But Java is more verbose and abstracts some low-level details away from the programmer, which you may enjoy learning about.

>>337031
I have a Bachelors in Theoretical Computer Science, been working as an embedded software developer for the last decade.

The other anon is right. You are fucking retarded.

>>337093
Well I wouldn't go that far. I think he's just equivocating. "Functional" means whatever you were told it means in class or in a book somewhere, basically.

I guess the main issue is calling a Language functional/object-oriented/etc. as if that's the only thing you can do in it.

>>337098
>every language is every language because Turing
C is widely understood not to be a functional language, and that's what matters.

You can write an interpreter for any paradigm in any language, but that doesn't change what your host language is. If it did, then every language would be every language, and there'd be no meaning in calling anything a functional language or an imperative language or a declarative language because everything would be everything.

>>336903
>And finally, what books can I work through to get me started on the basics and fundamentals?

http://4chan-science.wikia.com/wiki/Computer_Science_and_Engineering#Fundamentals

>>336903
>What are the main differences in terms of functionality; what can I do in Java that I normally cant in C/C++

Java is pure object- orientated proramming with maximum portability, write it once, execute it on nearly all systems.
C/C++ are not purely object orientated, C++ supports it but it's just optional and therefore not as in depth as in Java where the whole language is made around this paradigma.

>>337164
>Java is pure object- orientated proramming with maximum portability, write it once, execute it on nearly all systems.

Total fucking lie repeated nonstop. Java is complete hell trying to get it to run on different JVMs.

>C++ supports it but it's just optional and therefore not as in depth

You can do everything you want in C++ with objects that you can do in Java plus more stuff that Java doesn't let you do like multiple inheritances.

>>337171
No it's not. Unless you're doing something really weird with JNI, it delivers exactly what it promises.

>>337174
Or you use IceTea or Android and find the code you need doesn't work.

>>337184
Why would you expect Java to run on Android, when Android is not Java?

It also doesn't run on a Python interpreter, a ZX Spectrum, or a plastic dinosaur.

>>336934
>be me
>19
>learning programing
>JAVA
>Got no fucking idea when I arrived to arrays
>teacher is a pain in the ass
>Don't know objects, herentity, and control view model.
What to do? I don't wanna be a programmer, my parents told me to learn programming.
How can I learn faster?

>>337443

It seems that the basics of object oriented programming are missing, go away from actual code for a while and go over the object orientating paradigma again from the beginning. What IS a class and how does it connect to an object, what is an "object" actually? Why does the main of a Java program NEED the "static" in its declaration? Before you understood these things so much that can EXPLAIN them to others you cannot truely program object orientated, only simple one- class programs maybe. Understand THAT first before going to inheritance and polymorphism etc.

HOWEVER

>I don't wanna be a programmer, my parents told me to learn programming.

Oh man, that is a VERY bad base. You think you could learn Italian if you don't give a fuck about the language and don't plan to ever visit Italy or aren't forced to do it by Job etc?
How are you expecting to get into sth like Java if it actually pretty much pisses you off? To truely master it you have to make friendship or even fall in love with the language, if you don't at least have a bit of fun when coding then programming (in ANY language) isn't for you...

move this thread to >>>/g/