C++ which introduces additional notations with different semantics and implementations such as memory allocation
In what way does Objective-C not "introduce additional notations" over C?
[[MyType alloc] init]; or [MyType new];
Those look very much like 'additional notations with different semantics and memory allocation' to me.
I can write 'C' libraries and link them in on applications for iOS, Android, mainframe COBOL, Mac OS/X, any *ix operating system, Windows (including.NET), etc.
You can do that with C++ (or at least, I can - I can't imagine what's preventing you from doing the same).
As someone who actually uses this as a coding test for candidates, I've written a ridiculously long comment on your gist...
As I mention there, when somebody gives you a task this trivial, they're most likely looking for good style and practices, rather than just "did you get the right answer".
I give 30, but explain up front that I expect to see unit tests and some evidence of a TDD approach. I even give them their choice of git/hg/svn for versioning. For such a simple task, it's surprising to see how much trouble people have doing it test-first.
You can do ANYTHING in three lines of APL. Unfortunately, each of those lines is known to only one of the three remaining APL programmers. And they don't play nicely together.
Slashdot Mirror
Balmer's not interested in having his staff waste time on fixing bugs.
"I'll fix that bug later" is why you're having trouble meeting a deadline.
The long duration ones are taking even longer.
In that case, whoever's running the meeting isn't doing their job.
One team I worked on used to pass a 2-minute timer around the meeting; it worked wonders.
yo mama is more popular than C++ and Objective-C:
yo mama sucks - About 2,340,000 results
I really like D, but I expect it to remain niche; I doubt it'll ever become truly popular.
Not yet, it isn't
Ah, I see what happened there. The GP's awkward sentence construction left you with an ambiguous parse, and you picked the wrong noun.
C++ which introduces additional notations with different semantics and implementations such as memory allocation
In what way does Objective-C not "introduce additional notations" over C?
[[MyType alloc] init];
or
[MyType new];
Those look very much like 'additional notations with different semantics and memory allocation' to me.
I can write 'C' libraries and link them in on applications for iOS, Android, mainframe COBOL, Mac OS/X, any *ix operating system, Windows (including .NET), etc.
You can do that with C++ (or at least, I can - I can't imagine what's preventing you from doing the same).
Only if you don't understand how to use them correctly.
How come BATCH (.BAT) isn't on there, then?
Because people realise pretty quickly that trying to do anything with it is an exercise in futility, and they give up asking?
What's confusing about C? It's one of the simplest languages there is.
It does require developers to have a clue - but some may say that's not such a bad thing.
Forth is, in fact, an excellent language for writing embedded systems in (I did so for several years).
It's relatively easy to learn, it's extremely space efficient, it's fast.
What's not to like?
Thanks for the info - much appreciated.
If you can't do simple bit manipulation after 10 years, I'm not hiring you.
I did. Then I asked yo mama.
No - the whole *Universe*. In alphabetical order. Just like Wowbagger
As someone who actually uses this as a coding test for candidates, I've written a ridiculously long comment on your gist...
As I mention there, when somebody gives you a task this trivial, they're most likely looking for good style and practices, rather than just "did you get the right answer".
The 'r' was destroyed by a passing gammar ray.
I wouldn't ...
Please thank your interviewer for me - I'm going to pinch that idea.
I give 30, but explain up front that I expect to see unit tests and some evidence of a TDD approach. I even give them their choice of git/hg/svn for versioning.
For such a simple task, it's surprising to see how much trouble people have doing it test-first.
You can do ANYTHING in three lines of APL.
Unfortunately, each of those lines is known to only one of the three remaining APL programmers.
And they don't play nicely together.
Joshua - is that you? Would you like to play a game?
Children were just as safe before smart phones...
They were dangerous back then - and they're still dangerous now.
Stand in the car park?