private static bool GetTrue() { return true; }

[Spectere]

http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/Seeking-the-Truth.aspx

I literally facepalm'd.

[Bobbias]

Haha, that was awesome.

[Sneaky]

Gotta love how anyone who knows any bit of coding thinks they're the kind shit of nerds/programmers. I fucking hate that shit.

LETS START AN E PEEN CONTEST TO SEE WHO CAN COME UP WITH THE MOST VARIATIONS OF THIS CODE ALOALOOLOLOL JUAJUAJUAJUAJ JEJEJEJEJE

:l

[Spectere]

LETS START AN E PEEN CONTEST TO SEE WHO CAN COME UP WITH THE MOST VARIATIONS OF THIS CODE ALOALOOLOLOL JUAJUAJUAJUAJ JEJEJEJEJE

private static bool GetTrue() { return true; }
private static bool GetTrue() { return !false; }
private static bool GetTrue() { if(1==1) return true; else return false; }
private static bool GetTrue() { if(0==1) return false; else return true; }

...etc...

[Bobbias]

private static bool GetTrue() { '0' < '1' ? return 1 : return 0; }

[Spectere]

Ah, testing for truth with random, magic chars!  Nice touch.  I would have probably done something silly like this: 'A' < 'a' ? return true : return false; but hey, whatever works.

One little nitpick -- that code won't compile.  For the language bool type you have to use "true" and "false".  If it were a BOOL (like what Win32 uses, being a C-friendly API; note the caps) then everything would be kosher.

[Zakamiro]

Gotta love how anyone who knows any bit of coding thinks they're the kind shit of nerds/programmers. I fucking hate that shit.

LETS START AN E PEEN CONTEST TO SEE WHO CAN COME UP WITH THE MOST VARIATIONS OF THIS CODE ALOALOOLOLOL JUAJUAJUAJUAJ JEJEJEJEJE

:l

reminds me of the thread spec and I shat up in emilio's comedy barn.

[Spectere]

reminds me of the thread spec and I shat up in emilio's comedy barn.

We are very good at shitting, yes.

[Bobbias]

Ah, testing for truth with random, magic chars!  Nice touch.  I would have probably done something silly like this: 'A' < 'a' ? return true : return false; but hey, whatever works.

One little nitpick -- that code won't compile.  For the language bool type you have to use "true" and "false".  If it were a BOOL (like what Win32 uses, being a C-friendly API; note the caps) then everything would be kosher.

I was sorta assuming it was gonna be written in plain C/C++. Back in the old books I read, I thought I remembered something about C/C++ not caring what you passed into a bool because when it saw bool, it would just check for zero/non zero, regardless of what it actually was.

I haven't worked in C/C++ in fucking forever though.

[Spectere]

C doesn't have the bool type and C++ does, in fact, seem to allow you to use bool as an unsigned integer (tested with Visual C++ 2008 Express).  I think I've been using C# too much.

I seem to recall getting a compiler error from something when I tried to compare a bool to an int.  I might have had the compiler set to a really pedantic setting, though.

[Zakamiro]

I don't want to derail the thread, but someone talked shit about me trying to learn visual c++ 2005. They said it was to "old" and I should switch to a "better" and "newer" language because apparent c/c++ were outdated. Well, C needs way less code than nearly every language out there (except for obviously ASM, machine), and is a much better performer than C#.

Performance

C# programs, like all programs written for the .NET and other virtual machine environments such as Java, tend to require more system resources than functionally similar applications that access machine resources more directly.

Anyway, object-oriented design is still a little new for me, most of my experience comes from mIRC code, where the most object oriented design you get comes from hash tables and ini files. Ehm. Yeah. Thoughts/opinions?

[Spectere]

Naturally.

The real deal with languages like that is that you have to find the right balance of speed and convenience for what you want to do.  C# is a hell of a lot easier than C++ which is a hell of a lot easier than C.

[Bobbias]

Naturally.

The real deal with languages like that is that you have to find the right balance of speed and convenience for what you want to do.  C# is a hell of a lot easier than C++ which is a hell of a lot easier than C.

Agreed.
I learned C++, I've never really known what the differences were between C and C++, to be honest. I do know that c people use printf where lazy C++ users use cout. And Strings are new to C++, but that's all I really know, lol.

[Spectere]

Lessee, C++ introduces classes (which include the ability to overload operators), uses streams for most IO functions (cout, fout, etc), adds the bool type, templates, and I think that's about it (though those changes alone are quite significant).

The string type isn't technically a built-in type.  It's part of the standard C++ library.  The new features that C++ offers (namely, classes and operator overloading) are what allows them to appear to be integrated into the language.

[Bobbias]

Ok, yeah, i knew most of those, i just didn't think of it.