Ok this might seem pretty silly on a win32asm forum but i am sure ppl here code in more laguages than one.
Posted on 2001-09-01 11:42:39 by MovingFulcrum
Its a pity that there isn't a way to check all the languages you know, not just the one you use most. It would give a better image of the most popular languages. For example I can code in the following non too spectacular list of languages:

Visual Basic
Ansi C/C++ (No real OOP knowledge though)
A bit of Flash ActionScript
and of course
Posted on 2001-09-01 13:10:07 by Eóin
I was disappointed to see no perl.

I have experience in the following languages (some very minute):
Visual Basic
mIRC scripting (haha..yeah i know)
Posted on 2001-09-01 16:51:34 by vcv
Here are the languages I know, in the order I learnt them:
    [*]BASIC[*]Logo[*]6502[*]Pascal[*]680x0[*]C[*]x86[*]C++[*]HTML ;) Posted on 2001-09-01 20:30:50 by bitRAKE
I do mostly ASM because of the HE game now but i did some comercial ASM also

But where is Visual FxoPro? I code in that a lot also
a database language left aside...are you kidding?

Posted on 2001-09-01 20:36:29 by BogdanOntanu
Humm, I'm sure the list is incomplete...

1) Fortran
2) Cobol
3) 360 Assembly
4) TAG (360 macro language)
5) CICS (370 on-line extender for all languages)
6) Z-80 Assembly
7) Basic
8) C
9) 6502 Assembly
10) x86 Assembly
11) FileComp (helped develop 370 version)
12) Perl (not much)
13) Java (even less)
14) Windows API :grin:

I'm still active with #2 3 5 10 11 and 14.

Posted on 2001-09-01 22:31:26 by S/390

    [*]Commie 64 Basic...
    [*]Commie 64 ASM..
    [*]Turbo C....
    [*]68Hc11 (motorola asm)

    Hmm.. I feel dumb.. hehehe...
    And if you were to put me before all of em.. I would totaly suck now on all but MASM's.. because its the only one worth spending my time on....

    Theres no M$ clout in there as well, because im sick of the amount of crap you have to wade thu just to do Hello world. (Which is why i declined the fact I've played with M$ VB and M$ VC++)

    Oh ya, And i DO intend on learning PEARL sometime in the future.. i've dabbled a bit, but i definitely cant say i "know" it yet.

    10 For x = 0 to 15
    20 Poke 53280, x
    30 Poke 53281, x
    40 Next x
    50 Print "NaN"
Posted on 2001-09-02 00:55:31 by NaN

Assembly: x86, 6502, ~68k, embedded
C/C++: VC++ (win api), BCB (VCL), (palmOS)
Java: JBuilder (die Java die!)
others: i've read many cpu instruction sets over the years


thats some list... you da man!

dr phil :)
Posted on 2001-09-02 03:16:12 by phil
  1• Basic:
      Apple II, Comodore 64, Atari 512ST (BASIC & LOGO), GW-BASIC, QBASIC, QuickBASIC (Mac SE), PC-7 (Old school calc), TI-86 & 89 BASIC
  2• DOS Batch files
  3• Assember
      8086, MicroChip RISC, Z80 (TI-86 API), 80x86 (Win32 API)
  4• HTML
      3.2, 4.0, CSS
  5• PASCAL (sux*)
  6• Java (sux+)
  7• NC (Machining)
  8• PERL - CGI (kicks ass - easier than BASIC)
  9• Post Processor for MasterCAM
10• C (sux*), C++ (sux* - only read about it)
11• FORTH (niche - never had a use for the QED embedded computer)
12• BrainFucked (no, but looked at the web site)
13• My grandma's VCR

*note: They suck because of the large exe size.
+note: Is an explination really needed?
Posted on 2001-09-02 04:00:43 by eet_1024
eet, you are hilarious. You say C and C++ suck, while basic doesn't,
and you don't have any practical experience with c++. Large exe
size, pfft! If you care to take a look at the "win32_lean_and_mean"
post, you will see this is not true. For larger projects, C might end
up slightly larger than asm, but it will not be much. But of course
if you're a sad sloppy coder and have no clue about compiler/linker
settings, it might seem as if c/c++ produces huge executables.

Large executable size in pascal? Nah. Borlands pascal series
(16bit ones) actually generated some of the smallest code back
then, easily beating the various C compilers, while still giving you
a hell of a lot of runtime functions. Out of curiosity, I once removed
the entire runtimes, so I could have a sort of "high-level asm",
and the results were amazing... even though I'm generally against
any sorts of "hello world" benchmarking (think about it and you will
know it's stupid), I can say that I got executables in the byte-range
size... which is pretty good for any high-level language. And yes,
fully self-contained executables depending on nothing but dos.
Posted on 2001-09-02 09:40:32 by f0dder
Perl rules :grin:


use CGI::Carp qw(fatalsToBrowser);
print "Content-Type: text/html\n\n";
# Parse the form data
read(STDIN, $input_buffer, $ENV{'CONTENT_LENGTH'});
} else {
$input_buffer = $ENV{'QUERY_STRING'};
@data = split(/&/, $input_buffer);
foreach $val (@data) {
($name, $value) = split(/=/, $val);
$value =~ s/\+/ /g;
$value =~ s/%([a-fA-F0-9][a-fA-F0-9])/pack("C", hex($1))/eg;
$FORM{$name} = $value;

$action = $FORM{'action'};
$action = "uniqueadd" if $action eq "";

require "settings.cgi";
require "subs.cgi";

# Load the data;

if ($action eq "unique") {
print &getzeros($uniquehits);
elsif ($action eq "add") {
elsif ($action eq "uniqueadd") {
print &getzeros($uniquehits);
elsif ($action eq "total") {
print &getzeros($totalhits);


Posted on 2001-09-02 11:50:29 by vcv
I have a few problems with the list as well so I have not voted on any. From coming back to computers in about 1990 I played with the following from then onwards.

Assembler, MASM & TASM 16 + 32 bit
Basic, every dialect on the planet, even VB.
Microsoft C v6 (1990) to MSVC 6

I currently write in 2 and a half languages.

1. 32 bit MASM
2. 32 bit PowerBASIC DLL / Console
half. 32 bit Microsoft C (VC6) very occasionally.

MASM for the sheer grunt and PowerBASIC as the best "C" compiler I have ever used. It just keeps coming in handy to have the dynamic string and array capacity of basic available and a classy inline assembler that can be very easily mixed with HLL code.


Posted on 2001-09-02 18:52:57 by hutch--
hutch, reading about PowerBASIC and what you said, I'll considering purchasing it, but first I have a few questions:

1. In it truly compiled and require no runtimes?
2. Is it faster than say, Visual Basic?
3. Does it come with a dialog editor to make things a bit easier?
Posted on 2001-09-02 19:39:52 by vcv
OK, off the top of my head, a 32 year span would yeild:

ANSI Basic
IBM 360 Assembly
COSMAC assembly
Tiny Basic (Comedore64)
Tiny Basic (Sinclair)
8080 Assembly
HP Basic
QuickBasic (under DOS 2.0)
Visual Basic 3/WFW3.11
Visual Basic 4/W95
MSVC 5/W98
PIC Assembly
MASM Assembly

Ahh yes, the days of storing programs on cassette tape, while remembering other 'good old days' of the superior reliability of paper tape.
Posted on 2001-09-03 00:44:29 by Ernie