View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
vx Just Arrived
Joined: 27 Oct 2006 Posts: 0 Location: norway
|
Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 3:19 pm Post subject: Brainf*ck language |
|
|
Hei...
what is the brainf*ck programming language used to program?, and is it a good language to learn i.e. is there any use of it?
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Groovicus Trusted SF Member
Joined: 19 May 2004 Posts: 9 Location: Centerville, South Dakota
|
Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Other than having a provocative name, it's use is mainly academic.
brainf*ck
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
vx Just Arrived
Joined: 27 Oct 2006 Posts: 0 Location: norway
|
Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ok but is it worth to learn, and do I have any use of it?
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
alt.don SF Boss
Joined: 04 Mar 2003 Posts: 16777079
|
Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 11:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hello vx,
You are asking a question that only you yourself can answer. Take a look at the language and decide if it is worth your learning it. Our telling you it is really is rather pointless. To be honest you would be best off learning C, C++, ASM, or other mainstream language.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
vx Just Arrived
Joined: 27 Oct 2006 Posts: 0 Location: norway
|
Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 12:06 am Post subject: Thanks |
|
|
Thanks for all the answers I got
I have not decided jet but I am gone take a look at it soon
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
capi SF Senior Mod
Joined: 21 Sep 2003 Posts: 16777097 Location: Portugal
|
Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 6:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
brainf*ck (the link in Groovicus's post is pointing to the wrong thing) is a very esoteric programming language, with very little practical utility. It was designed mainly with the goal of creating a language that could be processed with the smallest possible compiler.
You may want to learn brainf*ck if you're a fan of obfuscated programming (for that kick of creating a program that actually does something and whose code consists solely of the symbols > < + - . , [ ]), or perhaps as an exercise in compiler design. Other than that, for any real purpose, I'd say learn one of the mainstream languages (my recomendation being, by far, C).
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Groovicus Trusted SF Member
Joined: 19 May 2004 Posts: 9 Location: Centerville, South Dakota
|
Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
the link in Groovicus's post is pointing to the wrong thing |
Huh? It is going to the same place you linked to??
Me is confused.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
capi SF Senior Mod
Joined: 21 Sep 2003 Posts: 16777097 Location: Portugal
|
Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Groovicus wrote: |
Huh? It is going to the same place you linked to??
Me is confused. |
Hmm, you're absolutely correct; it is pointing to the right place. That's odd, I'm virtually positive it was pointing to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/f*ck (literally, with the *) when I started to type my reply... I only even noticed it because I clicked on the link, and suddenly saw the f*ck page show up. I went back and mouse overed your post to check, even edited it to see the BBCode source, and I could swear I saw http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/f*ck
Obviously, you haven't edited your post since that (even if you had, it would be visible, as it would say "Last edited by groovicus blah blah"), so either I'm waaay sleepier than I think I am (it is 5:30 am ), or some weird censor-related bug creeped up.
That it was the f*ck page which I saw on Wikipedia, I know for a fact. That said, I've got a Firefox quick search for WK (so I can just type "wiki foobar" on the address bar to get to foobar), so I suppose it could have been that I instinctively typed "wiki f*ck" for some reason, instead of clicking on the link (I do use the "wiki foo" thing a lot). I'm pretty sure that wasn't the case, though. Besides, I don't use the form "f*ck", it's not something I would normally type. If anything, I would have typed either the original form or the other one I use, fsck (yeah, I'm a *nix guy )
Oh well...
Edit:
I've confirmed there is indeed some sort of censor-related bug, on another thread (sorry people, the link is to a thread in a staff-only area, it's an unrelated thread where the bug happened to manifest itself in a more noticeable manner).
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|