Bar Le Bar de la programmation

[mogwai93]

1/ peut on apprendre un langage de prog style C sans ordi sous la main?

oui c'est possible

à l'école tu apprends bien l'algorithmie sans ordi.......

meme si le passage sur l'ordi sera obligatoire à un moment, il faut toujours bien modeliser son programme sur papier avant

2/ a combien estimez vous le temps nécéssaire afon de commencer a comprendre ce langage quand on part du zero absolu

par exemple pour creer une petite aplication sans fenetre disons, juste en mode console capable d'interagir avec un OS tel que W$ je sais pas moi lister un repertoire par exemple, ou prog en mode fentre cette fois un jeu style pong

là, c'est + difficile à estimer, car ça depend de plusieurs parametres

- ta facilité d'apprentissage et d'adaptation

- l'OS sur lequel tu vas développer

- l'utilisation ou non de bibliotheques deja existantes

- ....

pour faire un programme basique en mode console, 1 à 2 semaines comme le dit playstation.2.fg

apres il en faudra +, si tu veux programmer en DirectX ou faire un programme qui gère les processus ou une grosse appli sous windows

bref, ca dependra de la complexité de ce que tu souhaites obtenir

mais pour savoir bien programmer, il faut savoir bien modeliser aussi (et bien documenter son code )

ca fait gagner du temps (autant dans la recherche de bugs que dans la comprehension du code si tu y reviens plusieurs semaines apres)

[Sentinel]

Cette question n'a rien à faire là, pose-la dans la section Création Web.

[.BöD.]

Hello,

Voila je cherche a acheter un livre sur le php, je développe déjà pas mal mais j'aimerais approfondir mes connaissances pour arriver a programmer de facon "professionnelle". Donc je cherche un livre qui couvre un peu tout avec un peu de mysql en prime.

Je voulais acheter PHP 5 Avancé mais il n'est plus dispo même chez Eyrolles qui en est l'éditeur...

J'ai trouvé celui ci : http://www.amazon.fr/gp/product/2841773388...ce&n=301061

Il couvre le php 5, cependant il m'a l'air trés axé sur la gestion sql plus que sur le php pur...

Vous connaissez de bons livres là dessus ?

[Le Saigneur Sombre]

Programming PHP, 2nd Edition By Rasmus Lerdorf, Peter MacIntyre, Kevin Tatroe

Publisher: O'Reilly

Pub Date: April 2006

Print ISBN-10: 0-596-00681-0

Print ISBN-13: 978-0-59-600681-5

Pages: 540

Web Database Application with PHP and MySQL, 2nd Edition By David Lane, Hugh E. Williams

Publisher : O'Reilly

Pub Date : May 2004

ISBN : 0-596-00543-1

Pages : 816

Ils doivent exister en Francais. Sinon la documentation de MySql contient beaucoup de renseignement, même si elle est relativement indigeste à la première lecture...

Il existe aussi d'autre sujets interessant comme UML, PhpUnit...

Modifié le 8 août 2006 par Le Saigneur Sombre

[Nis]

En ce qui concerne Php 5 Avancé, une nouvelle version (la troisième) devrait voir le jour d'ici peu ... Normalement

http://www.cyruss.com/blog/index.php?2006/...ce-3eme-edition

Vivement qu'elle sorte, je compte l'acheter :)

[Quarky]

Bonjour amis programmeurs/développeurs ...

Certains auront peut être décelé un détail important qui a changé pour moi : mon sabre !!!!

Je suis donc devenu modérateur entre autre pour cette section. Je remercie tout spécialement Sentinel d'ailleurs

Sinon pour .BöD., on a déjà parlé de Livre sur PHP au moins dans ce Bar mais il me semblait que sur un autre topic il en avait été également question : je trouves plus ....

Je te laisse le lien pour le post d'Ultimate qui avait lancé la demande !

Tu pourras relire nos INterventions ....

En gros, le livre que je proposais est plus un condencé de différentes mises en pratique. A posteriori, je dirais qu'il ne permet pas d'explorer tout le langage mais permet d'avoir des scripts utiles.

Et sinon celui-ci de Windu semble plus poussé. Le livre aborde plus le PHP en terme de "vrai" programmation mais à confirmer ... Tu peux toujours MP Windu !

[windu.2b]

Bon alors, pour PHP5 avancé (je tiens à préciser toutefois que je possède la toute première version, les révisions qui ont suivi ont peut-être amélioré tout ca):

C'est un bon bouquin, quoique je trouve son chapitre POO un peu light

Le tout est clair, bien expliqué, bien documenté...

Il aborde toutes les facettes de PHP: POO, I/O, cache, tableaux, base de données...

Il ne parle pas que de PHP5 (il précise les changement PHP4 -> PHP5 quand il y en a eu), même si le but est de présenter les nouvelles possibilités

Les auteurs sont connus et français (ce qui évite les traductions "foireuses")

Donc je le recommande pour quelqu'un qui veut se mettre à la prog PHP et/ou apprendre les particularités de PHP5

Le seul regret (à voir avec la 3° édition) est que le chapitre POO n'est pas assez poussé. Les exemple, bien que clairs, sont trop légers. Et il ne rentre pas dans les détails de la bonne prog objet (c'est bien beau de faire de l'objet, mais si c'est pour continuer à garder une logique procédurale... :/ )

[Le Saigneur Sombre]

Le problème c'est que la programmation orienté objet peut faire l'objet de plusieurs livres à elle seule.

Après les avoir lu, tu métrises toujours pas la POO. Y'a que la pratique qui permet de la maitriser.

Sinon la POO, c'est quand même de la programmation procédurale, faut juste créer un objet dans lequel tu places ta procédure

[windu.2b]

Sinon la POO, c'est quand même de la programmation procédurale, faut juste créer un objet dans lequel tu places ta procédure

Oui, bien sur

Mais la logique pour créer tes objets, les faire intervenir entre eux... Ca, ca change beaucoup

[Nis]

Hello

Encore une question sur un langage ... XML cette fois-ci. Totalement débutant dans ce truc.

J'aimerais avoir vos avis sur les livres que vous avez ... Il doit contenir les choses suivantes :

Langage et document XML

Déclaration de la structure du document : DTD

Schéma XML

Xpath - Xpointer - Xlink

CSS et XSL - XSLT - XSL-FO

J'ai vu XML en concentré de chez Oreillly [plus d'infos sur la version anglaise du livre] qui regroupe tout ça.

En espérant que le concentré ne soit pas trop concentré pour un débutant.

Merci pour vos avis.

[Charles.w]

Yop, c'est officiel...Java sera libre dans une soixantaine de jour...la nouvelle a été annoncée le 25 octobre...par conséquent, Sun devrait faire un petit cadeau de nowel au monde du libre

Sinon, pour le moment, sous JAVA RESEARCH LICENSE, on trouve ceci : http://www.java.net/download/jdk6/beta2/jd...02_jun_2006.jar

[theocrite]

La principale difficulté de SUN étant de trouver sous quelle licence mettre son bébé.

[lorinc]

boaf, sans doute la même que son solaris 10...

[Fab23]

Salut les gars!

Je connais le C, C++, C#, mais le C me semble assez dépassé maintenant et le C#, franchemant ça pu! ça tourne que sur Windows, etc...

Donc j'ai pensé au Delphi... Est-ce bien? Quel est le meilleur language pour vous? Avec si possible un compilateur gratuit...

Merci

[lorinc]

On the 1st of January, 1998, Bjarne Stroustrup gave an interview

to the IEEE's 'Computer' magazine.

Naturally, the editors thought he would be giving a retrospective

view of seven years of object-oriented design, using the language

he created.

By the end of the interview, the interviewer got more than he had

bargained for and, subsequently, the editor decided to suppress

its contents, 'for the good of the industry' but, as with many of

these things, there was a leak.

Here is a complete transcript of what was said, unedited, and

unrehearsed, so it isn't as neat as planned interviews.

You will find it interesting...

__________________________________________________________________

Interviewer: Well, it's been a few years since you changed the

world of software design. How does it feel,

looking back?

Stroustrup: Actually, I was thinking about those days, just

before you arrived. Do you remember? Everyone

was writing 'C' and, the trouble was, they were

pretty damn good at it. Universities got pretty

good at teaching it, too. They were turning out

competent - I stress the word 'competent' -

graduates at a phenomenal rate. That's what

caused the problem.

Interviewer: Problem?

Stroustrup: Yes, problem. Remember when everyone wrote

COBOL?

Interviewer: Of course, I did, too.

Stroustrup: Well, in the beginning, these guys were like

demi-gods. Their salaries were high, and they

were treated like royalty.

Interviewer: Those were the days, eh?

Stroustrup: Right. So what happened? IBM got sick of it,

and invested millions in training programmers,

till they were a dime a dozen.

Interviewer: That's why I got out. Salaries dropped within a

year, to the point where being a journalist

actually paid better.

Stroustrup: Exactly. Well, the same happened with 'C'

programmers.

Interviewer: I see, but what's the point?

Stroustrup: Well, one day, when I was sitting in my office, I

thought of this little scheme, which would

redress the balance a little. I thought 'I

wonder what would happen, if there were a

language so complicated, so difficult to learn,

that nobody would ever be able to swamp the

market with programmers?

Actually, I got some of the ideas from X10, you

know, X windows. That was such a bitch of a

graphics system, that it only just ran on those

Sun 3/60 things. They had all the ingredients

for what I wanted. A really ridiculously complex

syntax, obscure functions, and pseudo-OO

structure. Even now, nobody writes raw X-windows

code. Motif is the only way to go if you want to

retain your sanity.

Interviewer: You're kidding...?

Stroustrup: Not a bit of it. In fact, there was another

problem. Unix was written in 'C', which meant

that any 'C' programmer could very easily become

a systems programmer. Remember what a mainframe

systems programmer used to earn?

Interviewer: You bet I do, that's what I used to do.

Stroustrup: OK, so this new language had to divorce itself

from Unix, by hiding all the system calls that

bound the two together so nicely. This would

enable guys who only knew about DOS to earn a

decent living too.

Interviewer: I don't believe you said that...

Stroustrup: Well, it's been long enough, now, and I believe

most people have figured out for themselves that

C++ is a waste of time but, I must say, it's

taken them a lot longer than I thought it would.

Interviewer: So how exactly did you do it?

Stroustrup: It was only supposed to be a joke, I never

thought people would take the book seriously.

Anyone with half a brain can see that

object-oriented programming is counter-intuitive,

illogical and inefficient.

Interviewer: What?

Stroustrup: And as for 're-useable code' --- when did you

ever hear of a company re-using its code?

Interviewer: Well, never, actually, but...

Stroustrup: There you are then. Mind you, a few tried, in the

early days. There was this Oregon company ---

Mentor Graphics, I think they were called --- really

caught a cold trying to rewrite everything in C++

in about '90 or '91. I felt sorry for them

really, but I thought people would learn from

their mistakes.

Interviewer: Obviously, they didn't?

Stroustrup: Not in the slightest. Trouble is, most companies

hush-up all their major blunders, and explaining

a $30 million loss to the shareholders would have

been difficult. Give them their due, though,

they made it work in the end.

Interviewer: They did? Well, there you are then, it proves

O-O works.

Stroustrup: Well, almost. The executable was so huge, it

took five minutes to load, on an HP workstation,

with 128MB of RAM. Then it ran like molasses.

Actually, I thought this would be a major

stumbling-block, and I'd get found out within a

week, but nobody cared. Sun and HP were only too

glad to sell enormously powerful boxes, with huge

resources just to run trivial programs. You

know, when we had our first C++ compiler, at

AT&T, I compiled 'Hello World', and couldn't

believe the size of the executable. 2.1MB

Interviewer: What? Well, compilers have come a long way,

since then.

Stroustrup: They have? Try it on the latest version of g++ -

you won't get much change out of half a megabyte.

Also, there are several quite recent examples for

you, from all over the world. British Telecom

had a major disaster on their hands but, luckily,

managed to scrap the whole thing and start again.

They were luckier than Australian Telecom. Now I

hear that Siemens is building a dinosaur, and

getting more and more worried as the size of the

hardware gets bigger, to accommodate the

executables. Isn't multiple inheritance a joy?

Interviewer: Yes, but C++ is basically a sound language.

Stroustrup: You really believe that, don't you? Have you

ever sat down and worked on a C++ project?

Here's what happens: First, I've put in enough

pitfalls to make sure that only the most trivial

projects will work first time.

Take operator overloading. At the end of the

project, almost every module has it, usually,

because guys feel they really should do it, as it

was in their training course. The same operator

then means something totally different in every

module. Try pulling that lot together, when you

have a hundred or so modules.

And as for data hiding, God, I sometimes can't

help laughing when I hear about the problems

companies have making their modules talk to each

other. I think the word 'synergistic' was

specially invented to twist the knife in a

project manager's ribs.

Interviewer: I have to say, I'm beginning to be quite appalled

at all this. You say you did it to raise

programmers' salaries? That's obscene.

Stroustrup: Not really. Everyone has a choice. I didn't

expect the thing to get so much out of hand.

Anyway, I basically succeeded. C++ is dying off

now, but programmers still get high salaries -

especially those poor devils who have to maintain

all this crap. You do realise, it's impossible

to maintain a large C++ software module if you

didn't actually write it?

Interviewer: How come?

Stroustrup: You are out of touch, aren't you? Remember the

typedef?

Interviewer: Yes, of course.

Stroustrup: Remember how long it took to grope through the

header files only to find that 'RoofRaised' was a

double precision number? Well, imagine how long

it takes to find all the implicit typedefs in all

the Classes in a major project.

Interviewer: So how do you reckon you've succeeded?

Stroustrup: The universities haven't been teaching 'C' for

such a long time, there's now a shortage of

decent 'C' programmers. Especially those who

know anything about Unix systems programming.

How many guys would know what to do with

'malloc', when they've used 'new' all these years

- and never bothered to check the return code.

In fact, most C++ programmers throw away their

return codes. Whatever happened to good ol'

'-1'? At least you knew you had an error,

without bogging the thing down in all that

'throw' 'catch' 'try' stuff.

Interviewer: But, surely, inheritance does save a lot of time?

Stroustrup: Does it? Have you ever noticed the difference

between a 'C' project plan, and a C++ project

plan? The planning stage for a C++ project is

three times as long. Precisely to make sure that

everything which should be inherited is, and what

shouldn't isn't. Then, they still get it wrong.

Whoever heard of memory leaks in a 'C' program?

Now finding them is a major industry. Most

companies give up, and send the product out,

knowing it leaks like a sieve, simply to avoid

the expense of tracking them all down.

Interviewer: There are tools....

Stroustrup: Most of which were written in C++.

Interviewer: If we publish this, you'll probably get lynched,

you do realise that?

Stroustrup: I doubt it. As I said, C++ is way past its peak

now, and no company in its right mind would start

a C++ project without a pilot trial. That should

convince them that it's the road to disaster. If

not, they deserve all they get. You know, I

tried to convince Dennis Ritchie to rewrite Unix

in C++.

Interviewer: Oh my God. What did he say?

Stroustrup: Well, luckily, he has a good sense of humor. I

think both he and Brian figured out what I was

doing, in the early days, but never let on. He

said he'd help me write a C++ version of DOS, if

I was interested.

Interviewer: Were you?

Stroustrup: Actually, I did write DOS in C++, I'll give you a

demo when we're through. I have it running on a

Sparc 20 in the computer room. Goes like a

rocket on 4 CPU's, and only takes up 70 megs of

disk.

Interviewer: What's it like on a PC?

Stroustrup: Now you're kidding. Haven't you ever seen

Windows '95? I think of that as my biggest

success. Nearly blew the game before I was

ready, though.

Interviewer: You know, that idea of a Unix++ has really got me

thinking. Somewhere out there, there's a guy

going to try it.

Stroustrup: Not after they read this interview.

Interviewer: I'm sorry, but I don't see us being able to

publish any of this.

Stroustrup: But it's the story of the century. I only want

to be remembered by my fellow programmers, for

what I've done for them. You know how much a C++

guy can get these days?

Interviewer: Last I heard, a really top guy is worth $70 - $80

an hour.

Stroustrup: See? And I bet he earns it. Keeping track of

all the gotchas I put into C++ is no easy job.

And, as I said before, every C++ programmer feels

bound by some mystic promise to use every damn

element of the language on every project.

Actually, that really annoys me sometimes, even

though it serves my original purpose. I almost

like the language after all this time.

Interviewer: You mean you didn't before?

Stroustrup: Hated it. It even looks clumsy, don't you agree?

But when the book royalties started to come in...

well, you get the picture.

Interviewer: Just a minute. What about references? You must

admit, you improved on 'C' pointers.

Stroustrup: Hmm. I've always wondered about that.

Originally, I thought I had. Then, one day I was

discussing this with a guy who'd written C++ from

the beginning. He said he could never remember

whether his variables were referenced or

dereferenced, so he always used pointers. He

said the little asterisk always reminded him.

Interviewer: Well, at this point, I usually say 'thank you

very much' but it hardly seems adequate.

Stroustrup: Promise me you'll publish this. My conscience is

getting the better of me these days.

Interviewer: I'll let you know, but I think I know what my

editor will say.

Stroustrup: Who'd believe it anyway? Although, can you send

me a copy of that tape?

Interviewer: I can do that.

ça te donneras peut-être une réponse

[Fab23]

 while((iMC-SIN + iAnglais) != 1)
{
printf("Je ne comprend pas tout ce qu'il y a écrit!");
} 

Modifié le 10 novembre 2006 par mc-sin

[theocrite]

Moi ça me fait mal à la tête rien que de voir la longueur du texte.

Mais juste une chose : C# ne tourne pas que sous windows. Mais bon, les implémentations risquent de poser des problèmes juridiques (conneries de brevets logiciels, toussa, ...).

Et le C, ce n'est pas dépassé du tout.

Perso je pense que C (voire C++) d'un côté et perl ou python ou ruby (voire php) d'un autre offrent une très bonne complémentarité pour une grande partie des situations.

[lorinc]

vous ratez quelque chose, pourtant

[Fab23]

Je connais aussi le HTML/PHP/CSS/JAVASCRIPT, mais c'est innutile pour faire un bon programme... vu que c'est pour le web Alors il faut quel language...?

Le Java m'a l'air pas mal aussi...

[Nis]

C'est sur que le Java est pas mal utilisé ...

[theocrite]

so this new language had to divorce itself from Unix, by hiding all the system calls that

bound the two together so nicely. This would enable guys who only knew about DOS to earn a decent living too.

Stroustrup: It was only supposed to be a joke, I never thought people would take the book seriously. Anyone with half a brain can see that object-oriented programming is counter-intuitive, illogical and inefficient.

Interviewer: There are tools....

Stroustrup: Most of which were written in C++.

Interviewer: If we publish this, you'll probably get lynched,

you do realise that?

You know, Itried to convince Dennis Ritchie to rewrite Unix

in C++.

Interviewer: Oh my God. What did he say?

Stroustrup: Well, luckily, he has a good sense of humor. I think both he and Brian figured out what I was doing, in the early days, but never let on. He said he'd help me write a C++ version of DOS, if I was interested.

Interviewer: Were you?

Stroustrup: Actually, I did write DOS in C++, I'll give you a demo when we're through. I have it running on a Sparc 20 in the computer room. Goes like a rocket on 4 CPU's, and only takes up 70 megs of disk.

Stroustrup: Promise me you'll publish this. My conscience isgetting the better of me these days.

:D

Énorme ce gars

[theocrite]

Ayé, Sun ouvre sa JVM et d'autres trucs.

http://light.pcinpact.com/actu/news/32707-Sun-Java-GPL.htm

Bon c'est (presque) libre, mais ce n'est pas pour autant à l'abri des brevets.

Sans compter que java n'est pas dans la liste des choses défendues par l'oin.

[lorinc]

presque libre en GPLv2 ???

champagne, oui ! :tchintchin:

EDIT, effectivement, la version EE va être dans un premier temps sous licence CCDL qui est un équivalent de la licence mozilla

[windu.2b]

Vécu aujourd'hui (enfin, hier vu l'heure à laquelle je poste) en cours de JAVA:

Moi: mais tu le mets où le sleep() ?

un pote: DTC! Comme ca, ca fait un String

Voilà, voilà... C'était nul mais ca nous a éclaté pendant 5 minutes

[lorinc]

ça me rappelle ça : http://d-f-g.net/fun/pics/sexual/get_string.jpg