• MudMan@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    153
    ·
    3 months ago

    I think this thread is meant to flatter programmers and make linguists and sociologists extremely angry.

      • tetris11@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Does Russian have stricter grammar syntax than German? I was a bit puzzled by the comparison made above

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      3 months ago

      IDK, comparing Javascript to English while Java to German seems to either overblow the value of javascript or diminish the value of English.

      • Ziglin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yeah German isn’t nearly as bad as Java either. Also what is asm? Phoenetic script?

      • dosuser123456@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        23 days ago

        makes sense though. the definition on english speakers and js devs is accurate, english derived from german and js derived from java.

        • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          23 days ago

          English is derived from Latin as it was taught by Roman Legionaries, but German has large influences from both Latin and Indo-European languages.

  • Mad_Punda@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    100
    ·
    3 months ago

    I suspect there’s more people who speak Python fluently than Esperanto. So that comparison sits very wrong with me. The rest was funny :)

    • zero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      3 months ago

      Esperanto always struck me as more perl-like with each part of speech having its own suffix like perl has $ for scalars, @ for arrays, and % for hashes. Though perl is probably more like a bunch of pidgins…

      • umbraroze@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yeah, I was about to say.

        Perl 5 is like Esperanto: borrowed neat features from many languages, somehow kinda vaguely making a bit of sense. Enjoyed some popularity back in the day but is kind of niche nowadays.

        PHP is like Volapük: same deal, but without the linguistic competence and failing miserably at being consistent.

        Raku (Perl 6) is like Esperanto reformation efforts: Noble and interesting scholarly pursuits, with dozens of fans around the multiverse.

    • where_am_i@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      3 months ago

      Esperanto’s equivalent would probably be Haskell.

      Python is probably more like Spanish. Very easy basics, but then people from different regions of where it’s has spread out barely understand each other

  • nifty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    90
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Is this post sane-washing Russia? What’s left about Russia under Putin? Overall funny, though

      • ProgrammingSocks@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        32
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        The USSR was bad but it wasn’t communist. For that it would have had to have been stateless and classless, definitionally.

          • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            3 months ago

            I thought the political compass was itself just a popular perspective? It’s is a gross oversimplification of the ideas involved. Find me two leftists who even agree on what’s the farthest left.

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I’m not sure it is. Like, yes, it does exist in the Left/Right, Auth/Lib political compass, but that’s just a model. The stance has some inherent contradictions.

            And so does Right/Lib, for that matter. “Fiscally conservative/socially liberal” is a nonsense position, and those taking it tend to just be conservative in practice.

          • Bluetreefrog@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Is it was so great, why did most of the conquered nations run west as fast as they could as soon as they could? Must have been because the USSR was so ‘progressive’.

              • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                The Soviet people voted overwhelmingly in favor of retaining the Soviet Union, albiet with reforms, in a referendum that was ignored when the leaders of the USSR’s constituent republics agreed behind closed doors to dissolve the nation.

                The referendum (the only one they ever had) with it being in 1991 it was already a much different Soviet Union than we usually think and very late in its life as an effort to somehow keep it together, even though in a pretty different form. The wording makes it so that there was very little reason to oppose it unless you were a hardline independence advocate (so you might not respect their authority anyway or don’t want to give them credibility etc) since independence or no, it was promising more independence, human rights, freedom and so on. And in some countries that was tied to “let’s become independent at the same time but also keep in this new federation or what have you”. So it wasn’t even a “should we keep Soviet Union or not” but rather “should we make the union different, better”, which again, not much reason to oppose it no matter what you thought. Keeping it as it had been was the hardliner approach of keeping the older style Soviet Union and that wasn’t very popular.

                And the new treaty was never signed because communist hardliners tried a coup to reverse the course. The attempt backfired horribly and just lead to even swifter dissolution. But I’d say it was already heading towards that anyway with people seeking to break away from Moscow and the whole system in a turmoil over reforms (to some too radical and to some not radical enough). In hindsight it feels like they would’ve needed a miracle to keep it together in any recognizable form.

                • Bluetreefrog@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Not to mention that the vote was boycotted by Armenia, Estonia, Georgia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Moldova.

                  They were sooooo keen to return to the Russian embrace (/s).

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Progressive at first, but then sorta forgot about it.

            At the start, women were given rights that suffragists in the UK or USA could only dream of. Then it stopped. By the 1960s, women in the USSR found that they were still expected to do all the same old household chores while also holding a job outside the home. Meanwhile, western feminism had developed a strong second wave, and later a third (arguably more since, but that gets complicated). Those waves dealt with increasingly abstract issues in the patriarchy, including the problem of household chores.

            This simply didn’t happen in the USSR. Developing one would have required greater freedom of speech than anyone had in that country.

          • chaogomu@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            21
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            3 months ago

            Tried a bunch, but tried wrong.

            The Lenin model of communism is inherently flawed for one simple reason. An Authoritarian Communism is an Impossibility. It cannot exist by pure definition.

            The true ideal communism is a stateless utopia.

            So yeah, the Lenin model is flawed to the point of uselessness. Or worse because any authoritarian government is going to kill its own citizens, while also being a low grade threat to neighboring countries.

            No. The only path to true communism is via democracy. And there are countries that are moving in that direction.

            • anti-idpol action@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              The party was meant to just be the organizer of the workers, not the ruler. The degeneration took off only after Lenin’s death and the 4th Congress of the Comintern, which was dominated by Troika. that’s why Mayakovsky was a devout Bolshevik until Stalinzation advanced and started scrapping several progressive conquests of October, leading to his suicide at the refusal to prop up the Stalinist degeneracy.

              Also Lenin was, for instance, not a big fan of the many experimental artistic movements that flourished after the Revolution, but did not suppress them, unlike Stalin.

              He also regretted banning other parties (but which was necessitated by every single one of them taking up arms against Sovnarkom) and before his death wanted to offer Trotsky a post of Commisar of Internal Affairs in a desperate bid to curtail the bureaucracy, but Trotsky, unfortunately, refused.

              • chaogomu@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                Lenin betrayed the revolution. You mention the banning of the political parties. While it’s true that they “took up arms against Sovnarkom”, you’re leaving out the part where Lenin used Sovnarkom to coup the newly elected government because his party didn’t win.

                Again, Lenin was flat out wrong. But I don’t think he ever actually cared about Russia ever reaching the true Marxist communist utopia. Lenin cared about power first and foremost.

                He built up that dictatorship, and then handed it over to a monster.

  • Birbatron@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    57
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    the root of all modern languages

    the whole universe used to speak it

    uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

    P.S: the closest thing to that is Egyptian, but not the language, the Alphabet (the Symbols, not a literal alphabet). Tons of alphabets are descended from Egyptian, including, but not limited to: Greek (and by Proxy Latin, Cyrillic, Georgian, Armenian, Armenian and Armenian (I just noticed this, I’m leaving it in because it’s funny)), Arabic (and by proxy- I won’t list all that), Hebrew, and Aramaic (and by proxy all Indian languages but one, as well as Tibetan, Phags-pa mongol (and by proxy exactly 5 letters of Hangul), Thai, Lao, Sundanese, and Javanese). There’s a lot of dead languages that used scripts derived from Egyptian too but I didn’t mention them because I’d be here all day listing stuff like Sogdian or Norse Runes.

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          East Asia and it’s Chinese-derived alphabets being the big exception. The New World would be too, if it weren’t for barbarians in upturned helmets burning all the codices. I suppose Canada’s North is pretty dependent on indigenous syllabics, which were invented whole-cloth in the modern era.

          I was referring to the Latin as per OP, though. And even then “used to” is doing a lot of the work, thanks to the Islamic empire conquering the Middle East and North Africa and converting it to Arabic. And maybe Greek prevailing in the East, but I’m guessing it would be hard to put an end date on Latin in the Byzantine empire.

      • Birbatron@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Also descended from Egyptian. Forgot to add them though. They’re the link between Egyptian and Greek. and Egyptian and Aramaic

  • Juice@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Why is everyone down on Rust? Seriously. I don’t know it but I’ve considered learning it and it appeals to me and people literally scoff when I mention it. Saw it referred to as a meme language on Lemmy, which is built in Rust. What am I missing?

    • Feyd@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think rust has good ideas and may even become the default systems language in the mid-term. I find it irritating that there is a very vocal subset of rust proponents that tend to insist that every project in every language needs to be rewritten in rust immediately. I suspect that is also why other people are down on rust.

    • fl42v@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think ppl just got pissed with the fanboys unironically asking to RIIR everything. The language itself is comfy AF, tho

    • uis@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      For me “The Critical Flaw” of rust is its compiler. And requirent of 12 GB of disk space to compile just the frontend of compiler. Even GCC will all frontends(C, C++, Ada, Fortran, Modula-2, JIT) requires less space.

      But joke is probably about “rewrite in rust” culture.

      • bi_tux@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        that’s because Rust is more modern and in modern days we don’t rly have hard disk limitation, also it’s probably because the compiler tells you the solution to most problems

        • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          and in modern days we don’t rly have hard disk limitation

          well if you are a corporation, that’s true. Otherwise, not much

          • bi_tux@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            I mean c’mon, every pc that can compile rust in a reasonable time has at least 20gb of storage

            • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              yeah but I don’t want to use up 20 GB just for a single project. It’s not like my hard drive is 80% free. more like 10% free, even though it’s large, because I’m using it and I’m already selective on what I’m doing on it

    • Dessalines@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      3 months ago

      I don’t think many ppl are down on rust… it’s won developer’s most favorite to use for like 5+ years now in a row on stackoverflow.

    • Sl00k@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Imo it’s bc it’s the new kid on the block. Yes it’s 10 years old but barely becoming common use in production and government mandates are only speeding that up. In actuality it’s a great language and has been hyped for a few years by people who actually use it. Python went through the same thing in the 2010s where devs really tried clowning on it, now it’s used everywhere.

    • affiliate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      i think it’s mainly people being cranky and set in their ways. they got used to working around all the footguns/bad design decisions of the C/C++ specifications and really don’t want to feel like it was all for nothing. they’re comfortable with C/C++, and rust is new and uncomfortable. i think for some people, being a C/C++ developer is also a big part of their identity, and it might be uncomfortable to let that go.

      i also think there’s a historical precedent for this kind of thing: when a new way of doing things emerges, many of the people who grew up doing it the old way get upset about it and refuse to accept that the new way might be an improvement.

      • Juice@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        Is Rust as close to the metal as C? Seems like there would still be a need for C. I could see Rust replacing Java as something that’s so ceremonial and verbose, but from my limited perspective as a sometimes java dev, having only the most glancing experience with C, it seems like C would be hard to replace because of what it is. Buy I honestly don’t know much about Rust either, I just think JS is so finicky and unpredictable whereas web assembly seems extremely fast and stable.

        • themoken@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Rust can create native binaries but I wouldn’t call it close to the metal like C. It’s certainly possible to bootstrap from assembly to Rust but, unlike C, every operation doesn’t have a direct analog to an assembly operation. For example Rust needs to be able to dynamically allocate memory for all of its syntax to be intact.

          • Ephera@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            3 months ago

            For example Rust needs to be able to dynamically allocate memory for all of its syntax to be intact.

            Hmm, you got an example of what you mean?

            Rust can be used without allocations, as is for example commonly done with embedded.
            That does mean, you can’t use dynamically sized types, like String, Vec and PathBuf, but I wouldn’t consider those part of the syntax, they’re rather in the std lib…

            • themoken@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              So you’re right that this is a bit arbitrary because the line between the standard lib and the language is blurry, but someone writing Rust is going to expect Vec to work, it doesn’t even require an extra “use” to get it.

              Perhaps a better core example would be operator overloading (or really any place using traits). When looking at “a + b” in Rust you have to be aware that, depending on the types involved, that could mean anything.

              Anyway, I love Rust, it just doesn’t have the 1:1 relationship with the assembly output that C basically still has.

        • Thinker@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          I mean, the simple proof is that Rust has been growing by leaps and bounds in the embedded world, which is the closest to bare metal you get. It’s also being used in the Linux kernel and Windows, and there are several projects building new kernels in pure Rust. So yeah, it’s safe to say that it’s as close to the metal as C.

          Also, the comparison to Java is understandable if you’ve only been exposed to Rust by the memes, but it doesn’t hold up in practice. Rust has a lot more syntax than C (although that’s not saying much), but it’s one of the most expressive languages on the market today.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          It’s slightly less close to the metal as C. Array bounds checks are always going to cost you something, for example. However, if you look at the speed of numeric computation in C, Rust, and Go, they’re all in the same order of magnitude performance compared to things like Python or JavaScript (not including things like PyPi, which is C with extra steps).

          • Juice@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            Wow thanks so much for breaking that down for me! The discussions I’ve been having here and the information devs are sharing is really kicking me off the fence about learning Rust

            • frezik@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Eh, I’d still go for it. I find the Rust compiler tends to amplify my impostor syndrome–it tells you all the ways you are objectively being stupid. I know that’s not really selling it, but it’s doing that stuff for a reason. I’m especially hopeful that it becomes the standard way to do things with microcontrollers; that’s about the only place I write C/C++ at all.

    • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Cause it’s a C++ replacement when said audience never asked for one. It’s great but it’s still waaaayy too early, people need to slowly get comfortable with it.

    • vga@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It’s like a good C++ that is actually able to replace it. There are lots of places where a good C++ is useful. Like everything that needs low latency and low resource usage.

      But it’s not an easy language, so (I’m guessing) people who see everyone loving it but are unable to learn it start to suffer some sort of cognitive dissonance. If it’s too difficult for me to learn, that must be its fault, not mine.

  • vga@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    PHP is Russian. Used to be huge, caused lots of problems, now slowly dwindling away. Its supporters keep saying how it’s still better than the competition.

  • amuck1924@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    3 months ago

    I can confidently tell you that no one who actually knows Latin would ever say French is “Latin with fancy rules.”

    • TexasDrunk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s just Shatner, isn’t it? Except even he doesn’t really speak it even though he was in a movie that was entirely Esperanto.

  • Codex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I guess assembler is sumerien then, only still written and understood? And cobol or fortran? Linear a and b?

  • OpenStars@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Perl is… forgotten entirely, despite its efforts in getting us from there to here.

    Yup, checks out.

    PHP also, but good riddance:-D.

    Shell scripting is the ink that makes up these words - without them, you would never have seen this image.

    • kboy101222@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think Perl is closer to Esperanto - the vast majority of people will never want to learn it and the people that know it won’t stfu about how everyone should use it! And they could all use a shower!

      (I kid… Mostly)

      • OpenStars@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        You… you shut up! Excuse me, I have to go take a shower:-) (/s, edit: to be clear on both sentences here)

        Anyway you’re right (no /s) - at one point it filled in a gap between the likes of C++ and Assembly on the one hand and shell scripting (bash, awk, grep, sed, each with its own syntax and very little of that shared in common with one another) and I guess Fortran on the other. I still prefer it enormously to everything else - it’s quirky but fun:-) - though I get why a less experienced person should choose Python and stick with it, even as we all wish that there was another alternative that would work better than either.

        And since I can’t resist: Perl is 8-20x faster than Python, and major websites like DuckDuckGo and booking.com use it. Sigh…I guess it’s time for that shower now:-).