On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 2:48 AM, Walter Bright <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote:
> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>
>> Yea. If Java's design philosophy were a valid one, there would never have
>> been any reason to move beyond Altair-style programming (ie, entering
>> machine code (not asm) in binary, one byte at a time, via physical toggle
>> switches). You *can* do anything you need like that (It's Turing-complete!).
>
> Yeah, and I've seen OOP done in C, and it works. It's just awful. I've even seen OOP done in assembler (Optlink!).
>

There's even a book about it!

[pdf] http://www.cs.rit.edu/~ats/books/ooc.pdf

I've never read it though.

You could do OOP in HLA (of course nobody treats that as a real assembler :p. But the book that comes with it is great.).

"Walter Bright" <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:i4kjdp$2o9f$1@digitalmars.com...
> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> Yea. If Java's design philosophy were a valid one, there would never have been any reason to move beyond Altair-style programming (ie, entering machine code (not asm) in binary, one byte at a time, via physical toggle switches). You *can* do anything you need like that (It's Turing-complete!).
>
> Yeah, and I've seen OOP done in C, and it works. It's just awful. I've even seen OOP done in assembler (Optlink!).

I've seen high-precision PI calculation done in MS batch:

http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/Stupid-Coding-Tricks-A-Batch-of-Pi.aspx

And Adam Ruppe did cgi in Asm:

http://www.arsdnet.net/cgi-bin/a.out

And some massochist did a compile-time raytracer in C++:

http://ompf.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1556

Yea, I know that had already been done in D, but D's compile-time processing doesn't suck :)

On 8/19/10, Nick Sabalausky <a@a.a> wrote:
> And Adam Ruppe did cgi in Asm:
>
> http://www.arsdnet.net/cgi-bin/a.out

Did I post that to this list, or did it find its way around the Internet on its own? I saw it randomly pop up on a Google search last year too, on a list I've never even heard of!

The best part is it is mostly just a hello world...

Andrej Mitrovic:
> You could do OOP in HLA (of course nobody treats that as a real assembler :p. But the book that comes with it is great.).

I may like to see the built-in asm of D replaced by HLA :-)

Bye,
bearophile

Some guys are using a hotkey automation scripting language to write/execute machine code:

http://www.autohotkey.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=21172&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 3:05 AM, Nick Sabalausky <a@a.a> wrote:
> "Walter Bright" <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:i4kjdp$2o9f$1@digitalmars.com...
>> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>> Yea. If Java's design philosophy were a valid one, there would never have
>>> been any reason to move beyond Altair-style programming (ie, entering
>>> machine code (not asm) in binary, one byte at a time, via physical toggle
>>> switches). You *can* do anything you need like that (It's
>>> Turing-complete!).
>>
>> Yeah, and I've seen OOP done in C, and it works. It's just awful. I've even seen OOP done in assembler (Optlink!).
>
> I've seen high-precision PI calculation done in MS batch:
>
> http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/Stupid-Coding-Tricks-A-Batch-of-Pi.aspx
>
> And Adam Ruppe did cgi in Asm:
>
> http://www.arsdnet.net/cgi-bin/a.out
>
> And some massochist did a compile-time raytracer in C++:
>
> http://ompf.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1556
>
> Yea, I know that had already been done in D, but D's compile-time processing doesn't suck :)
>
>
>

"Adam Ruppe" <destructionator@gmail.com> wrote in message news:mailman.383.1282266517.13841.digitalmars-d@puremagic.com...
> On 8/19/10, Nick Sabalausky <a@a.a> wrote:
>> And Adam Ruppe did cgi in Asm:
>>
>> http://www.arsdnet.net/cgi-bin/a.out
>
> Did I post that to this list, or did it find its way around the Internet on its own?

I honestly don't remember. All I know is whenever I did first see it, I created a saved IM away message about it. I remembered I had it there, went to get the link from it, and thought "Oh, hey, I recognize that domain!" :)

> I saw it randomly pop up on a Google search last
> year too, on a list I've never even heard of!
>

Funny how that happens sometimes. Back in college, a friend of mine was
inspired by the Pokey The Penguin online comic (
http://ompf.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1556 ) and its deliberate MSPaint
crappiness. So he created a "Poop and Friends" comic in a similar vein. It
was deliberately stupid humor, although not gross-out stuff, despite the
name. (It's no longer around in any form, and the wayback machine doesn't
have any of the images:
http://web.archive.org/web/20031118234038/http://www.poopandfriends.cjb.net/
 ). But a few years after my friend started it, my brother was told by one
of his friends "There's this site you have to see!" Turned out to be Poop
and Friends.

On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 4:45 AM, Walter Bright <newshound2@digitalmars.com>wrote:

> Walter Bright wrote:
>
>> http://www.drdobbs.com/blog/archives/2010/08/c_compilation_s.html
>>
>> I'll be doing a followup on why D compiles fast.
>>
>
> On reddit:
>
> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/d2wwp/why_c_compiles_slow/
>


Thanks for the free Karma, btw     :P

Hello Nick,

> "Walter Bright" <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote in message
> news:i4kjdp$2o9f$1@digitalmars.com...
> 
>> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> 
>>> Yea. If Java's design philosophy were a valid one, there would never
>>> have been any reason to move beyond Altair-style programming (ie,
>>> entering machine code (not asm) in binary, one byte at a time, via
>>> physical toggle switches). You *can* do anything you need like that
>>> (It's Turing-complete!).
>>> 
>> Yeah, and I've seen OOP done in C, and it works. It's just awful.
>> I've even seen OOP done in assembler (Optlink!).
>> 
> I've seen high-precision PI calculation done in MS batch:
> 
> http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/Stupid-Coding-Tricks-A-Batch-of-Pi.asp
> x
> 
> And Adam Ruppe did cgi in Asm:
> 
> http://www.arsdnet.net/cgi-bin/a.out
> 
> And some massochist did a compile-time raytracer in C++:
> 
> http://ompf.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1556
> 
> Yea, I know that had already been done in D, but D's compile-time
> processing doesn't suck :)
> 

Um... does Boost fit in here?

-- 
... <IXOYE><

"BCS" <none@anon.com> wrote in message news:a6268ff1a3d88cd0def4795927c@news.digitalmars.com...
> Hello Nick,
>
>> "Walter Bright" <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:i4kjdp$2o9f$1@digitalmars.com...
>>
>>> Yeah, and I've seen OOP done in C, and it works. It's just awful. I've even seen OOP done in assembler (Optlink!).
>>>
>> I've seen high-precision PI calculation done in MS batch:
>>
>> http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/Stupid-Coding-Tricks-A-Batch-of-Pi.asp x
>>
>> And Adam Ruppe did cgi in Asm:
>>
>> http://www.arsdnet.net/cgi-bin/a.out
>>
>> And some massochist did a compile-time raytracer in C++:
>>
>> http://ompf.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1556
>>
>> Yea, I know that had already been done in D, but D's compile-time processing doesn't suck :)
>>
>
> Um... does Boost fit in here?
>

Zing! :)

On 08/19/2010 09:53 PM, Seth Hoenig wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 4:45 AM, Walter Bright
> <newshound2@digitalmars.com <mailto:newshound2@digitalmars.com>> wrote:
>
>     Walter Bright wrote:
>
>         http://www.drdobbs.com/blog/archives/2010/08/c_compilation_s.html
>
>         I'll be doing a followup on why D compiles fast.
>
>
>     On reddit:
>
>     http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/d2wwp/why_c_compiles_slow/
>
>
>
> Thanks for the free Karma, btw     :P

At over 200 points, that was a homerun. I think it would be really classy if Walter did /not/ write "Why D compiles quickly" for his next installment.

Andrei