/sci/ - Science & Math

[δ !ok/MkdpFbs No.4339302]

Just made this, what do you guys think.

in b4 programming isn't science

[Anonymous No.4339304]

nope

[Anonymous No.4339306]

>implying delphi isn't there
>implying op is a fag which failed

[δ !ok/MkdpFbs No.4339309]

>>4339306
Delphi is obsolete. There is Lazarus though. Pascal is a language, Lazarus/Delphi are IDEs.

[Anonymous No.4339311]

But programming isn't science.

[δ !ok/MkdpFbs No.4339313]

>>4339311
Is so

[Anonymous No.4339314]

>>4339302
programming isn't science
on an unrelated note; picture is bullshit
You can't compare non-turing complete languages (SQL, but also HTML) with turing complete languages. You don't have a well-defined metric, so how can you compare interpreted languages (scripts) with compiled languages? How can you compare object oriented with non-oo (and put the only non-oo at the top)? Javascript > java. PHP > Pascal.
Piss off.

[Anonymous No.4339316]

>imokwiththis.cs

[Anonymous No.4339317]

>>4339309
But Delphi(amming) aren't(isn't) IDEs.

Java = mother of all languages

[Anonymous No.4339319]

>>4339313

No it isn't.

[δ !ok/MkdpFbs No.4339324]

>>4339314
>You don't have a well-defined metric
It's called personal preference.

Also, CSS + HTML is Turing complete.

>>4339319
How is that.

[Anonymous No.4339331]

>MySQL
>php - average tier
>javascript,C# bro tier
>java - shit tier
>python with C/C++


You're retarded OP, go back to being a codemonkey on /g/

[Anonymous No.4339332]

>>4339324
So in your personal preference, you prefer to do server-side scripting in javascript, rather than php (since javascript>php). You prefer to query a database with C code, rather than MySQL.
One cannot construct a total order of the quality of languages (putting the issue of subjectivity aside), since one language might be more suitable for one task, and the other for another task.

Also, pretty cool that html+css IS a turing complete language, I'll be reading up on that now...

[Anonymous No.4339334]

>>4339324
>codemonkey =/= science
>writing code =/= science

[Anonymous No.4339338]

>>4339332
I did some reading up, and already, it's appearant that HTML+CSS3 is NOT turing complete.

[Anonymous No.4339345]

I prefer C++ in the sense that I have the most fun using it, but ranking languages with no criteria for the product being developed is ridiculous.. Fuck off, OP.

[δ !ok/MkdpFbs No.4339346]

>>4339332
I'm not sure if you're trolling or not. I said it was sorted by preference, yet you insist that there should be some logical hierarchy. It's just how appealing I find those particular languages

>>4339334
So by your standards, programming <=> code monkey / writing code? You're not making a whole lot of sense here.

>>4339338
As far as I know, it is. Link to what you've been reading?

[δ !ok/MkdpFbs No.4339348]

>>4339345
>ranking languages with no criteria for the product being developed
So you're saying things like semantics, syntax, usability, overall elegance hold no value in your world? You must be a robot ...

[Anonymous No.4339351]

>>4339324
HTML+CSS is turing complete? Are you implying you can perform calculation and run algorithm on HTML+CSS?

[Anonymous No.4339352]

>>4339346
>programming <=> code monkey / writing code
>writing code
>code monkey

It is. Show me valid proof of programming being an actual science. Just because you have to think about what you do before hand and come up with algorithms doesn't make i a science

[δ !ok/MkdpFbs No.4339354]

>>4339351
Well apparently you can code Rule 110 automation in it, which is Turing complete, so yeah.

[δ !ok/MkdpFbs No.4339357]

>>4339352
>Just because you have to think about what you do before hand and come up with algorithms doesn't make i a science

sci·ence
noun /ˈsīəns/ 
sciences, plural

The intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment
- the world of science and technology

A particular area of this
- veterinary science
- the agricultural sciences

A systematically organized body of knowledge on a particular subject
- the science of criminology

Knowledge of any kind

>Knowledge of any kind

I rest my case

[Anonymous No.4339358]

>>4339354
Except that it has to be of bounded size, so yeah.

[Anonymous No.4339359]

>>4339352
It's more engineering and "art" than sience. I say art using " because people tend to be pissed when you say that word, and I'm not particularly fond of it either. But there is a certain creative quality a good programmer needs, which best resembles that of other creative people who make art and shit. But no, "programming" or even software development is not a science, and thank god for that.

[δ !ok/MkdpFbs No.4339363]

>>4339358
And besides it needs a "push", it can't run on it's own. As far as I know. So it's sort-ish Turing complete.

[δ !ok/MkdpFbs No.4339364]

>>4339358
And besides it needs a "push", it can't run on it's own. As far as I know. So it's "sort of" Turing complete.

[Anonymous No.4339365]

>>4339357
>Knowledge of any kind

cool story tripfag, everything is a science by that definitions

[Anonymous No.4339366]

>>4339363
Well, that's OK, since turing machines, as Turing envisioned them, also needed 'pushes'.
As long as the person, or object, 'pushing' the machine doesn't need to be stateful, it's ok. (So blindly ramming a button would be fine)

[δ !ok/MkdpFbs No.4339368]

>>4339365
Talk to the dictionary people.

[Anonymous No.4339370]

>>4339368
No, you're retarded. I bet you think biology is a hard science too?

[δ !ok/MkdpFbs No.4339371]

>>4339370
>hard science
Sure is