Favorite programming language?

what is your Favorite programming language?

Fortran.

ANSI Cobol

Fortran.

isn't it supposed to be capitalized? like: FORTRAN?

Doesn't look like it is lately, though, sorta like how it's Visual Basic, and not Visual BASIC probably... more a display thing.

Like many languages there is even a compiler for FORTRAN that compiles to CLR IL:

http://www.mpassociates.gr/software/distrib/science/lahey/lfnet.html

Then again, there seems to be a .NET compiler for almost any language these days. this one seems to actually boast integration with Visual Studio, which is not as rare as just being tossed the compiler and told to figure it out like for some other CLR languages.

For me, I have no favourite language. There are languages I know inside and out- like VB6, those that I am strong with, but wouldn't go so far as to say I know inside and out C#, F#, Java, VB.NET, Javascript, VBScript, PHP, XAML (if it counts)) those I can use effectively with enough time, (C++, C, Python, Perl, a few others), and then there are the rest.

{{Infobox programming language
| name                   = Fortran
| logo                   = [[File:Fortran acs cover.jpeg|150px]]
| caption                = ''The Fortran Automatic Coding System for the [[IBM 704]]'' (October 15, 1956), the first Programmer's Reference Manual for Fortran
| paradigm               = [[multi-paradigm programming language|multi-paradigm]]: [[imperative programming|imperative]] ([[procedural programming|procedural]]), [[structured programming|structured]], [[Object-oriented programming|object-oriented]], [[Generic programming|generic]]
| year                   = 1957
| designer               = [[John Backus]]
| developer              = [[John Backus]] & [[IBM]]
| latest release version = Fortran 2008 (ISO/IEC 1539-1:2010)
| latest release date    = 2010
| typing                 = [[strongly typed

BASIC

C

I like C++ and PERL equally!!!   

I like C++ and PERL equally!!!   

No way! You can not love them both! 

isn't it supposed to be capitalized? like: FORTRAN?

The change happened when FORTRAN 77 was (eventually) succeeded by Fortran 90.

I like C++ and PERL equally!!!   

It's normally just called "Perl" as that is the preference of one Larry Wall, inventor and demi-God in the programming world.

C#

At college project we had most of them in C#, so it has gone quite favorite.

BATCH!!!!!!

BATCH!!!!!!

NO! BO! BO! 

NO! BO! BO! 

PEEP

Prolog.  I have fond memories of Prolog.  Likewise Turtle Basic (although I think that one might not be Turing complete...)

Today most of my work is in PHP/javascript, but both languages have too many flaws for me to claim them as my favourite.

Never knew it. Never will. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prolog

Prolog has its roots in first-order logic, a formal logic, and unlike many other programming languages, Prolog is declarative: the program logic is expressed in terms of relations, represented as facts and rules. A computation is initiated by running a query over these relations.[4]

Never knew it. Never will. 

why?

Imperative Programming languages aren't the best tool for everything. Most people just think they are.

Declarative Programming Languages have plenty of applications and there are plenty of situations where they are ideal. SQL, for example. The focus is not on how the program does what it does, but more on what it does. This means that for the most part you are usually limited in some way as to what you can tell it to do. On the other hand, you can still get it to do just about anything. People have written SQL queries that generate ASCII mandelbrots, for example.

Functional Programming, like F#, Lisp, scheme, and if you want to, even segments of C# can be written in a "functional" way. For the most part, it's similar to Declarative programming- in fact, Functional Programming is in many ways a subset of Declarative programming, but with a focus on solving problems through recursion. The only way for somebody used to an imperative style to understand the Functional style is through contrast.

Say you have a list in C. And you want to pull out every Xth element. You'll have to point at the first element. set a counter to 0. Then, you add X to that counter until X is greater than the size of that list, and with every item, add it to a new list.

The equivalent in a functional language would be to write a function (surprised?) that recognizes when the size of a list is a multiple of X, and then pass that function to the list, possibly with another snippet of code (a lambda, for example) to hand back the head of your list if your X-recognizer evaluates to true, and discard it if it evaluates to false. The two functions recurse through the list and finally hand back a list consisting of every Xth element.

For example, let's say you have a List<String> (List of Strings) in C#. Since C# supports both programming models, the contrast can be most apparent. the "Traditional" method might work like this:

Code: [Select]

public List<String> EveryX(List<String> OfList,int X)
{
List<String> returnlist = new List<String>();
int i=0;
for(i=0;i<OfList.Count();i+=X)
{
    returnlist.Add(OfList[i]);
}
return returnlist;
}

(note, might not be 100% accurate, but the jist is about right). Now, compare that to the functional way to do the same thing:

Code: [Select]

List<String> everyN =  list.Where((x, i) => i % (n-1) == 0);

The latter method is shorter, but might seem more confusing. And in a way, it is. Functional Programming can be a mind bender, which is one reason why Lisp, Scheme, Haskell, Prolog, and other declarative/functional languages have never really surpassed C, C++, Java, COBOL, or other imperative languages in commercial popularity. But there are benefits to the functional way of doing things. For one thing, if you can get the logic correct, functional programming requires orders of magnitude less code than the imperative approach. That means fewer points of failure, less code that needs tested, and in general a more productive (and happier) programming experience. As systems get bigger, this is starting to become more and more important.

The industry is young, and yet so many people seem to think that we're at the "mountaintop" when it comes to the tools we use and the hardware we use and so forth. C/C++, and other imperative languages are not the be-all end all of programming languages, and so-called programmers who discount other programming styles as "novel" simply because they do not understand their paradigms is possibly one of the things holding back Software development as an industry and keeping it in some weird Limbo between arcane wizardry, gambling, and art.

Isn't asking a programmer what is their favourite programming language a bit like asking a builder what is his favourite brick?

Isn't asking a programmer what is their favourite programming language a bit like asking a builder what is his favourite brick?

Yes, and sometimes we get a good rant from BC_programmer.

I like red bricks. But I am not a bricklayer. So it doesn't count. Which brings us to "Ruby on Rails". I presume it is red.

I guess I meant that a proper practical builder will say "Well, for cladding an external wall I'd use red facing bricks, and for load bearing I'd use building bricks, and where strength and low water absorption are key requirements, I'd probably choose engineering bricks." So you say, "Yes, but what's your favourite?" And he says, "I don't really have one; I use the right one for the job. If I only knew how to use one brick, or insisted on only using one type out of aesthetic reasons, I wouldn't be a builder, I'd be a hobbyist, a guy who plays around with building materials."

Got it!
OK, after that I am ready. Here it comes...
Now that I am retired, I am at last a real Hobbyist. So I now can admit my favorite programming tool is:
Aston Tate DEBASE II om CP/M.

Got it!

So I now can admit my favorite programming tool is:
Aston Tate DEBASE II om CP/M.

The second quote clearly refutes the former.

Isn't asking a programmer what is their favourite programming language a bit like asking a builder what is his favourite brick?

yes. precisely.

What you get from "What is your favourite programming language" is a bunch of people talking about different programming languages which in a lot of cases are built for a lot of different tasks. Another analogy would be to ask somebody what their favourite workshop tool is. Obviously, you use a hammer for hitting nails, a screwdriver for driving screws, a plane for smoothing wood, rivetdrivers for metalworking, etc. You can't have a favourite tool. Now, you can have a favourite task that uses that tool. For example, if somebody finds hammering nails to be their favourite task, than they might claim that a hammer is their favourite tool. But what they are really saying is that they prefer the experience of hammering nails. The fact that it uses a specific tool isn't necessarily relevant. At the same time, there will be people saying "Well I have always preferred the experience of using a Screwdriver". Then the Hammer person will refute that the Screwdriver is good at Screwing in screws, but it fails miserably at removing nails from plasterboard. And then you just get back and forth about what each tool is best at and what they are better at.

"Language Wars" as far as Computer programming are at worst slagfests that bring nothing of useful value to anybody and at best moronic. programming Languages can't be compared, since they can't really be measured. They were all designed for different purposes, and for those purposes, they are usually very well suited. As an example- take Scheme. It was designed to be used to teach programming concepts. That's pretty much all it is used for, however- you don't see commercial applications written in scheme. Because it doesn't work very well outside the classroom. However, it works very well to teach the principles of Computer Programming, and the fact is that teaching using a language like scheme is useful for the very reason that it's not used outside that context. Students are able to take-away from their lessons the concepts, not the syntax. Far too often do I see people focussing on the particulars of the syntax of the language being taught. But the fact is, usually those courses are for teaching programming. The fact that they are teaching it using Java, or C, or whatever is a irrelevant detail. What is important is the concepts.

Students are able to take-away from their lessons the concepts, not the syntax. Far too often do I see people focussing on the particulars of the syntax of the language being taught.

Yea. 

"Language Wars" as far as Computer programming are at worst slagfests that bring nothing of useful value to anybody

This is a mode of behaviour common among adolescent males: what is the best car/plane/gun/phone/motorcycle/computer game/CPU/gaming motherboard/display card/whatever. Toys for boys. One-upmanship. Ego. To even have a "favourite" language is to have royally missed the point of what programming is about.

This is a mode of behaviour common among adolescent males: what is the best car/plane/gun/phone/motorcycle/computer game/CPU/gaming motherboard/display card/whatever. Toys for boys. One-upmanship. Ego. To even have a "favourite" language is to have royally missed the point of what programming is about.

I think the main reason for those types of things is that, by default, people like to think they are intelligent. That sort of goes without saying. The implication that the language they prefer to use is somehow not ideal at everything, seems to them to "attack" the notion that they made an intelligent choice with that language, and learning it. You can usually tell the difference between somebody just bleating that the language is best and somebody who learned it as well as other languages. The former will be very argumentative when their "favourite" language is criticized in any way. And admittedly, when VB6 was pretty much the only language I was particularly proficient in, I was the same way with it. Now that I've learned several, I know that I was quite wrong in those defenses. At the same time, though, people who attack a Programming language are really just trying to bolster their own choice not to use that language, which is oftentimes the same situation. Then you have the people who seem to think that braces and semicolons are the only way to code.

Myself, I might be inclined to say my "favourite" language is C#. However I also understand that that favouritism is merely a result of my familiarity with the language, and the fact that I am unfamiliar, or at least less proficient, with any number of other languages that might suit a given task better. And thus my preference is purely subjective and is not indicative that it is the best choice- but rather that it is my choice.

What is annoying is to see threads, here and elsewhere, that essentially ask "What programming language should I learn" which are from somebody who wants to learn to program. I find this annoying because the question is sort of idiotic (to be blunt). Rather than wasting time asking what you should be learning, you should just choose something and learn it. It doesn't really matter what language you start with, as long as you don't stay with that one language and try to shoehorn it into niches it doesn't belong (like trying to write a CGI script in C++). It is the concepts behind the language that are important, not whether it's "easier" to learn a language because it does or does not use certain punctuation or because it "encourages good whitespace use". Many times I've suggested that they not learn one language, but several. And most importantly, avoid language elitism. And forget any arguments that "Language X is easier to use" because when you don't know how to program no programming language is going to be "easy to use", so it doesn't much matter what a person learns.

I mean, I've seen flamewars about the ideal lower bounds of an array! How can somebody even hold an opinion over whether an array should start at 0 or whether it should start at 1?

How can somebody even hold an opinion over whether an array should start at 0 or whether it should start at 1?

Human vanity and folly know no boundaries. Some people will take up and defend a position about anything. It's interesting to note that the two alternative conventions about ordering of individually addressable sub-components within the representation of a larger data item, Big-endian and Little-endian are thus named because of the controversy in the fictional world in Swift's satire, Gulliver's Travels. The eponymous hero discovers two countries, Lilliput and Blefuscu, which have gone to war over which end an egg should be broken, the big end or the little.

"Which two mighty powers have, as I was going to tell you, been engaged in a most obstinate war for six-and-thirty moons past. (...) the primitive way of breaking eggs, before we eat them, was upon the larger end; (...) the emperor his father published an edict, commanding all his subjects, upon great penalties, to break the smaller end of their eggs. (...) Many hundred large volumes have been published upon this controversy: but the books of the Big-endians have been long forbidden (...)"

Big end.Little end. Let's compromise. Make the middle the default. That will please nobody equally.

In Pascal, you specify what boundaries you want for an array.
Examples of this would be having a list of different types or records.

Code: [Select]

type my_list_of_names = array[0..7] of string;
 var the_list: my_list_of_names;
 begin
  the_list[5] := 'John';
  the_list[0] := 'Newbie';
end;

To even have a "favourite" language is to have royally missed the point of what programming is about.

Oh I disagree.  I nominated Prolog for its elegance and because it was the sandpit in which I learnt the overwhelming might of deep recursion.

I also have a favourite tool; a Makita combi drill.  But I certainly haven't missed the point of what DIY is about.

Machine Language

Which one?

He probably meant x86 because it is the most common.

He probably meant x86 because it is the most common.

I doubt it. There is little reason to program 8086 at the machine code level. Programming in machine code would mean compiling a program using pencil and paper and a reference manual. This is needed if you wee to build your own motherboard from scratch and you do not have a compiler for it. (In this context assemble and compile are used to mean the same thing. Don't argue about it, please.)

There are other CPUs that have been or are being used in various devices. Support for these devices is thin and fat. Little support with big price.  Some builders prefer to write the code by hand rather that buying expensive software tools. with license restrictions.

http://www.zilog.com/

Python and Ruby on Rails!

C# for me.

Currently learning Objective C.

Depends on what you want to do, of course.  Coming from the sciences, FORTRAN was probably the most useful at the time - you know - submitting punched cards to the guys with the white coats running the main frame.  Later, back in the days of teletypes and punched tape over long lines, BASIC was about the only thing we could use.  Have used a lot of languages since - Pascal, C, Python, etc (but never COBOL).  The language that taught me the most though was FORTH.  Nothing but that tiny shell (both a compiler and an operating system) between the programmer and the chip.  A friend used to liken Pascal programming to swimming in body armor ad FORTH programming to swimming naked in a pool full of sharks.  Nothing like RPN, and LIFO and FILO stacks that are part of the way the computer really works to help clear the mind.

Sorry, but I don’t know how to put the “yuk” smiley after COBOL.

Not to obscure the topic but the question is what is fav prog lang, not why
 
for that i would have to add LISP (or AutoLISP from Autodesk) as a great programming language that was full featured *but only running inside of AutoCAD
 
once you got your head around the atoms and ()'s, then all was good. wrote about 400 programs during the 10 year stint as an AutoCAD guru...
 
just MHO

DOS BASIC
C++
shell script
HTML
BTW: You can't do a lot of things with BATCH.

HTML

Not a programming language though - merely a markup language. 

I agree with you, but it is development too, no?

I agree with you, but it is development too, no?

Topic title is favorite programming language.

Code: [Select]

User.favoriteLanguage = "C#";
But I'm currently learning C++.

LINQ

Code: [Select]

from p in this.GetFavouriteLanguages() where p.StartsWith("C") select p orderby p;

heh, LINQ was confusing at first but I find myself using it everywhere:

Code: [Select]

public List<String> GetWorkOrderActiveWorkerNames(String OrderID)
{
   //retrieves a list of names corresponding to the active (clocked-in) workers on this order
   return (from m in GetWorkOrderActiveWorkers(OrderID) select UserNameFromPIN(m)).ToList());

}

YUM. Tastes Enterprisey.

Or some of the LINQ I use in my Arkanoid clone thing. I really go overboard with it sometimes.

Code: [Select]

foreach(ZipEntry loopentry in (from x in readfile.Entries where x.FileName.StartsWith("Images",StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase) select x))
{...}

or the path editing of the editor... Actually I don't even remember why I have it sorting, this seems to be one of the places that I've not commented for whatever reason:

Code: [Select]

var foundpaths = (from n in SelectedPath.pathPoints where n.Selected orderby n.Location.X ascending select n);



PHP. It's also the language I'm probably most fluent in.
Or Batch. (a lot of people will shoot me for saying that, but I like how it gets things done right away in just one command. Few other languages have a single three-letter function to delete a file.)

PHP. It's also the language I'm probably most fluent in.
Or Batch. (a lot of people will shoot me for saying that, but I like how it gets things done right away in just one command. Few other languages have a single three-letter function to delete a file.)

perl has unlink. Visual Basic has kill. BASIC has kill as well. BASH has rm. python has os.remove, C#/VB.NET has File.Delete().

As far as I'm concerned, the fact that a given language/shell happens to be have a shorter command to perform certain functions only serves to deepen the ambiguity. Bash has rm, but seriously, how is that self-indicating?  Sure, it stands for "remove" but it could just as easily stand for Raise Modifier, or "reset mysql" or something (and rm=remove.... remove what?) same with "kill" in VB6 is ambiguous, and hardly self-documenting, since you will have to look it up if you don't know what it does. File.Delete() requires absolutely no information to understand what it is doing.  Yes, it does the unthinkable and requires more typing- but it's more clear. The shorter you make keywords, functions, and parameter names, the more likely it is that what you are working with becomes write-only. Consider the premier write-only language- regular expressions, and how most of it's structures are a single character or bracketed set of characters, then come back and tell me how that serves an advantage to people trying to read it.

So Batch has del, which is really just a short form of erase (though I don't remember which was first). this makes sense, one can assume any non-associative command is probably to do with files. SQL has "DELETE" as well, but it is specific to it's own domain whereby it deals in database structures. new functions, classes, namespaces, and libraries need to be designed, not just thrown in randomly. Particularly in polymorphic languages, where you ought to be able to deal with any number of related structures in  similar ways. Or, you could have languages like PHP which start out without any long-term goal and as they develop new features are just tacked on with new functions using a naming scheme that seems to depend more in the chinese calendar than it does on trying to be self-documenting.

PHP is a fine language, for it's own purposes. Honestly I think a little piece of me dies inside when I am forced to deal with it. Not because it's a bad language, but because the standard constructs are just so awfully planned out. Quick- without looking it up- is the function isset() or is_set()? is it isnull(), or is_null()? Do you call sort() or array_sort()? etc. I stopped bothering to even try to remember half the functions outside the few more consistently named ones and just keep about 20 tabs open to PHP documentation, with a side of some alcoholic beverage to keep me sane, when I need to deal with PHP. One blessing it has is that you actually have to explicitly mark variables global, which is a good thing to keep from polluting the namespace. But when it's already filled with so many functions with inconsistent names, return values, and parameter lists I'm not really sure you could pollute it if you tried.

I choose Visual Basic .NET 2008 over all others because I'm most comfortable with it. (I'm teaching myself others.)

the standard constructs are just so awfully planned out

So true.  Fortunately, PHP has about the best online documentation out there.  These days, the function hinting in NetBeans is pretty good, so I don't have to remember the precise naming so much...  Plus OO is much improved so there's a bit more logic available to namespaces, etc.

batch (i actually made batch programs like gamers net which was a network of NES roms and Chat in the jacks which is a chat room in my teachers class) I lost all of my copies 

For my first post,  my favorite programming language is REXX
Learned it back in the late '80s & '90s, on VM/CMS, now using Reginald Rexx on the PC  (free interpreter)
Cleanest language I've ever seen.

I have a place in my heart for QBasic, as ugly as it may be.

I have a place in my heart for QBasic, as ugly as it may be.

Why call it ugly? It still works. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.

Here is something fun for Assembly "experts".

Which is a faster way to get a return address:

Code: [Select]

GetCurrentAddress:
    mov eax, [esp]
    ret

being called like so: (in a C ASM block, so the mov refers to a local C variable currentInstruction)

Code: [Select]

call GetCurrentAddress
mov [currentInstruction], eax

or this assembly, which ends up with the same data:

Code: [Select]

call L1: pop currentInstruction


I don't know the first thing about Assembly, so wouldn't call myself an expert, but is it this one?

Code: [Select]

GetCurrentAddress:
    mov eax, [esp]
    ret


I don't know the first thing about Assembly, so wouldn't call myself an expert, but is it this one?

Code: [Select]

GetCurrentAddress:
    mov eax, [esp]
    ret


Yes, even though it is twice as many instructions and a function call, it's faster. The other one digs into internal CPU structures and mucks up the instruction prefetch cache so that every single return on the call stack has to discard it's branch predictor.

On another note, occasionally, there will be a conversation where somebody is saying how much more superior C++ is to any other language; they will state things like "it's faster" (it's not), or "It's easier to code (*censored* no)". The counter-argument runs to the accord of "C++ complicates things" which they will inevitably say it doesn't.

To which the only question to ask would be "just what is a protected abstract virtual base pure virtual private destructor, and when was the last time you needed one?" The fact is, they won't know the answer. Truly, most of the people I know who might call themselves "C++ wizards" are really programming in some sort of unholy blending of C code (rife with security exploits like using gets() and executing System() calls) and C++ ("I put uses namespace std at the top so it's C++!).

This isn't to say that C++ is inferior, but the fact is that just because everybody uses it doesn't suddenly make it good. It low-level, and t's being used for tasks in which a low-level language isn't required. And those tasks that it is suited for discard it in favour of C because C++ is far "too heavy." That is, for a low level language, it hides a lot of what it does during compilation. The Speed argument is utterly idiotic because you can write slow code in any language and you can write fast code in any language. What's important is that even a skilled C++ programmer cannot necessary write code faster than a programmer in another language. Many people attribute this to "well that's because those other languages have IDE's and Designers and intellisense, It's not programming! It's like using powerpoint" this was mentioned towards VB4, I believe, in comparison to C++. Well, see, the thing is, when it comes to deliverables, people prefer to pay for something that exists. Deciding between a developer who should have the C++ implementation done "real soon" and a VB developer who already has a working implementation is a no brainer. The company doesn't care that a lot of self-righteous snobs think Visual Basic is "unclean" or "stupid" the fact that the software exists in that case and doesn't in the other is what decides their choice.

Myself? I an write windows applications in C using the standard API. You know all that fun stuff like WNDCLASSEX and RegisterClassEx and CreateWindowEx() and of course message pumps. I don't do that because I want to concentrate on what the application is going to do, not which HMENU I should attach a popup I made with CreatePopupMenu(), and trying to remember the difference between CreatePopupMenu() and CreateMenu(). The primary attribute of a good programmer is Sloth, and all the "toy" languages as self-proclaimed programming purists call them add things like libraries and frameworks that help programmers get things done, not spend another week re-architecting their Shell_NotifyIcon() wrapper class. That's why most development in C++ leverages some other library (like BOOST,, ATL, etcetera). or the programmer has to follow a set of guidelines (such as RAII (Resource Allocation Is Initialization)) or something like COM Smart Pointers. these are, strictly speaking, things that should be implemented Once, by the language compiler, and only once. Instead, what we end up with is so many libraries, structures, rules, and guidelines that we lose sight of the forest through the trees. C++ at this point is more about learning your chosen framework, designed to hide the low-level details of your Operating System that you would normally call. And at that point, why are you using C++?

C++ should, IMO, be mostly for development of things that actually require something at a low-level; things like Device Drivers. But then you'll be more likely to use C for those purposes anyway, since C++ is too heavy and brings with it too much mental baggage.

When I am programming I don't want to have to remember the difference between a static volatile non-const variable and a non-volatile register const variable. half of the stuff being determined by language constructs can easily be optimized away by a proper compiler, and many times are, making a lot of C/C++ keywords do absolutely nothing.

This particular post was spurned by somebody telling me that "C# is a toy language, you should learn C++ that way MS doesn't dictate your language". Let's consider the idiocy of the statement. First, they state that C# is a toy language. Based on that particular persons history and postings, I was aware that they were 16 and still in school. Meanwhile, I have recently started actually making money off my development. if C# is a toy language, it's a *censored* profitable one. Second they know nothing about the language or framework and conveniently ignore the fact that C# as a language is just as much an ECMA standard as Javascript or ANSI SQL, and that there already are other implementations. Or the fact that Microsoft seems to be the only language vendor that actually knows what the *censored* they are doing. This also conveniently ignores the fact that I already know quite a bit about C++. Low level stuff can be interesting, and fun, but when it comes down to business, I want to concentrate on that business, not on esoteric errata. The number of instructions you can shave off your functions hasn't been anything more than an exercise in trivial hubris for years, and has no place in a professional environment. Clean, easy to read code is always superior to esoteric code that uses undocumented functions or processor errata to speed up performance of a seldom called function by a tenth of a percent, particularly since the former also assigns importance to portability and maintenance.

"Write something once. Write it well, move on, and then use it when you need it". I follow this to a tee. I once needed a easy ability to sort a ListView when columns were clicked, show and change the header so that it showed the sort order, and allow callbacks to implement a custom sort on the listview items. I could have baked that code right into the application and tied it directly to that specific listview, but instead I wrote a self-contained class that I can instantiate passing the listview and it deals with the rest. Same with dealing with INI files. Same with countless other tasks. The net result is that I am happier and I get my work done faster. I may love programming but I still have other interests and I would rather be deciding what to spend a thousand dollars on than deciding which of my routine implementations is less likely to trash the stack.

Yes, even though it is twice as many instructions and a function call, it's faster.

I thought I smelled a trick question!

Tcl it's the only one I have ever used to make chat bot programmes and the such.

Atm I'm learning Haskell, it's really nice and clean, no variables to mess with 

Atm I'm learning Haskell, it's really nice and clean, no variables to mess with 

A reference would help. Hard to find a definitive source.

...is a standardized, general-purpose purely functional programming language, with non-strict semantics and strong static typing.[5] It is named after logician Haskell Curry. In Haskell, "a function is a first-class citizen" of the programming language.[6] As a functional programming language, the primary control construct is the function. The language is rooted in the observations of Haskell Curry and his intellectual descendants

If you want to know more, look here:
http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Applications

The HCAS Hello World program:
main = "Hello World!"
Output: \Hello World!"

 

A reference would help. Hard to find a definitive source.
If you want to know more, look here:
http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Applications
 

Sorry I forgot to add a link, my bad 
Here's one to make it up to you =)
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/simonpj/papers/haskell-tutorial/

And talking about the source, are you talking about the source code to work with haskell?
If so here are some links:
http://hackage.haskell.org/platform/ (complete platform)
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ (ghc =  compiler, ghci = interactive shell)
http://community.haskell.org/~ndm/hlint/ (code beautifier)
http://www.haskell.org/hoogle/ (API documentation and search engine)

If not and you were referring to finding a good link, to find information, you already found one, first hit on google...

This isn't to say that C++ is inferior, but the fact is that just because everybody uses it doesn't suddenly make it good. It low-level, and t's being used for tasks in which a low-level language isn't required. And those tasks that it is suited for discard it in favour of C because C++ is far "too heavy." That is, for a low level language, it hides a lot of what it does during compilation. The Speed argument is utterly idiotic because you can write slow code in any language and you can write fast code in any language. What's important is that even a skilled C++ programmer cannot necessary write code faster than a programmer in another language. Many people attribute this to "well that's because those other languages have IDE's and Designers and intellisense, It's not programming! It's like using powerpoint" this was mentioned towards VB4, I believe, in comparison to C++. Well, see, the thing is, when it comes to deliverables, people prefer to pay for something that exists. Deciding between a developer who should have the C++ implementation done "real soon" and a VB developer who already has a working implementation is a no brainer. The company doesn't care that a lot of self-righteous snobs think Visual Basic is "unclean" or "stupid" the fact that the software exists in that case and doesn't in the other is what decides their choice.

Myself? I an write windows applications in C using the standard API. You know all that fun stuff like WNDCLASSEX and RegisterClassEx and CreateWindowEx() and of course message pumps. I don't do that because I want to concentrate on what the application is going to do, not which HMENU I should attach a popup I made with CreatePopupMenu(), and trying to remember the difference between CreatePopupMenu() and CreateMenu(). The primary attribute of a good programmer is Sloth, and all the "toy" languages as self-proclaimed programming purists call them add things like libraries and frameworks that help programmers get things done, not spend another week re-architecting their Shell_NotifyIcon() wrapper class. That's why most development in C++ leverages some other library (like BOOST,, ATL, etcetera). or the programmer has to follow a set of guidelines (such as RAII (Resource Allocation Is Initialization)) or something like COM Smart Pointers. these are, strictly speaking, things that should be implemented Once, by the language compiler, and only once. Instead, what we end up with is so many libraries, structures, rules, and guidelines that we lose sight of the forest through the trees. C++ at this point is more about learning your chosen framework, designed to hide the low-level details of your Operating System that you would normally call. And at that point, why are you using C++?

So true, in fact when C++ actually is required to make the end-product because the company's trying to release to a home audience (so wants something faster than VB4) then usually the first point of call is to design the application and try it out in VB4 first because of how quick and easy it is, but as for anything not being released to the public, C# and VB are the kings of this kind of interface development.

I know C++ well, but C#?  Not as much as I'd like.  I really need to get around to learning it, I'm very aware of how important it is for Windows app development!

MFC C++

Python