C whenever I have to write something which handles binary files or where speed is important, Ruby and Lua for most other things, and HTML/CSS/javascript/PHP/SQL etc for web stuff.
Also, it should be stated that (X)HTML is not a programming language. There are absolutely no similarities between HTML and other programming language whatsoever, due to the fact that HTML's purpose is mark-up (hence why it stands for HyperText Mark-up Language). If you're going to call (X)HTML a programming language, you might as well call BBCode a programming language as well. As for me, I've begun learning C++, and I feel that I've got a good basic understanding of procedural programming (how to use poitners, arrays, dynamic memory allocation, for the most part), and I hope to start learning about the object-oriented aspects of the language itself sometime soon. However, I don't have the audacity yet to say I've officially "learned" a programming language-- although that's certainly a long-term goal of mine. =P
Plain C is my programming language of choice, it's very easy to code in it if you grasp it and compilers can be found nearly everywhere. I don't like C++ much and I learned a bit of it just to make a GUI for a doomed program of mine, but I've forgotten almost everything of it.
Bla the world has changed. Yeah its technically a markup language, but there was a time when it fit under the umbrella of things considered to be programing languages. I guess now that most people know some form of HTML programmers of lower level languages can't stand to have their epeen hurt and get all technical like this. And yeah, I would call BBCode a programming language. Just a very shitty very high lev one. The higher the level you get the less it resembles binary.
PHP for web scripting work, and VB6 for apps C/C++ scare the crap out of me, I was tortured and abused by Java at university and will never go through that HELL again, and VB.NET is gay and made of AIDS.
I'm a fan of C# myself, but I also know a little C/C++ and Python. Before this I was into VB and QBasic. I really don't want to get into a big debate, but I think .NET/Mono and associated languages a little under-appreciated. It certainly doesn't have 100% the performance of native code, but for applications that don't need that 100% it's a choice to consider. Besides having a large base class library to use in your apps, you can use whatever language that can target .NET/Mono, and that includes C#, VB.NET, Boo, IronPython, IronRuby, C++/CLI, etc. And because it's language-agnostic, class libraries made in C# for example can be used in any other .NET language, and vice versa. No need to mess with header/lib files either. But, to be fair, I'll point out a couple major flaws: OS portability and deployment issues. For non-Windows OSes you can use Mono, but it's unfortunately always playing catch up to the changes Microsoft keeps making. And by the time they catch up, Microsoft makes a new release of the .NET Framework. Besides that you have the fact that people need to have .NET installed in order for such apps to function at all. It's not a *huge* problem especially if an installer can install it automatically, but it's not as fun when you want to distribute using .zip's or (insert archiving format here). For me, the disadvantages aren't enough to keep me from using C#/.NET. That, and the fact that I'm not particularly experienced with C/C++. But don't get me wrong; I don't hate native languages. In fact, I appreciate native code just as much as managed code... just that I use managed code as a personal preference. Ultimately you just need to use whatever tool fits the job. If managed code works, great. If native code works better, use that instead. No tl;dr, sorry. ;P
Most programmers (or at least good programmers) don't like considering HTML a programming language is because, frankly, it never compiles to binary. Every programming language has to assemble into binary at one point in order for it to be considered a programming language, and HTML simply fails to meet this requirement. Another reason why it annoys me is because HTML isn't turing-complete at all (hint: it can't preform any computations a turing machine can). So, to consider it a programming language is ridiculous in the farthest sense. Yes, but every high level language eventually compiles to binary. I suppose if you want you can argue that HTML is the divide-by-zero of high level languages, since it never compiles to binary. =P
I'm an awesome Basic programmer. Being old school, I prefer Quick Basic over Visual Basic, but I can use the latter as well. I also know C, C++, Pascal, x86 and 68k assembly, Java, and some minor languages you probably never heard about. But yeah, my language of choice is definitely Basic.
I know a little bit of C#, and a little bit of ASM. I would love to learn even more about both languages, especially ASM because it's fascinates me. (Well both fascinate me, but ASM is more complex and I don't mind a challenge. ^^)
Ravenfreak, I hope you don't mind if I merged your thread with an older one with a similar topic. If you do, I'll have no problems to split them again Also this is a recommended read, although not similar enough to be merged as well :p edit: for reference, Ravenfreak's topic's title and subtitle were "What Programming Languages Do You Know Or Would Like To Learn?" / "This thought just crossed my mind..."
I generally use a mix of C and C++, along with x86 assembly for optimizations in some cases. Also, M68K assembly for pyl-md, though I haven't done much work on pyl-md recently.
I write all my programs in Visual Basic .NET. I also frequently deal with x86 ASM and less frequently, 68000 ASM. I also know some Java, but I never use it.
I like 68k ASM, I'm tentatively poking the behemoth that is Z80 ASM now that I know it's nowhere near as scary as it looks, and I've dabbled in C#. (Yeah, fuck your "everyone knows ASM" rule, just because you know 68k ASM doesn't mean you know all ASM anywhere.)
