Cheat Engine :: View topic - Best Language for bot creation?

Cheat Engine
The Official Site of Cheat Engine

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Best Language for bot creation?
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

Cheat Engine Forum Index -> General programming

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Chaos_Blader
Newbie cheater

Reputation: 0

Joined: 07 Sep 2007
Posts: 12

Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 6:29 pm Post subject:

The argument or his point? It was a really weak argument to begin with, because it got greatly digressed from the main topic. The best language for bot creation. Java is most likely as good as PHP for bot creation.

DeltaFlyer
Grandmaster Cheater

Reputation: 0

Joined: 22 Jul 2006
Posts: 666

Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 6:31 pm Post subject:

Flyte wrote:

DeltaFlyer wrote:

Quote me where I have said it was an invalid argument, please, as I could not find it in my own post. I have only stated that comparing two languages made for completely different purposes without a specific context is foolish as blankrider have done.

Code:

I have always stated that Java isn't built for deep system interaction...There is no one language that does all, which is why I have stated that comparing Java and C without a specific context is foolish.

Code:

You try putting a C++ program onto a web page viewable by all major web browsers.

Sorry, I don't see the words "invalid argument". I said Java isn't built for system interaction.

Flyte wrote:

If an entire language relies on the existence of another language, then in it can only be as portable as the virtual machine it runs on.

Also: Comparing a coding language to computer hardware is like comparing a book to a fridge, please think of a better analogy. Don't compare a computer to the world either, they are not even close to being the same thing.

The examples were linked through the interdependencies between the objects listed in the examples. Java requires C to function, C requires binary coding to function, binary coding requires hardware to function.

About the computer to world thing, you're bending my words again:

DeltaFlyer wrote:

Saying A is better than B simply because B depends on A to function is not true, whether in the world of computers, or the world outside.

Flyte wrote:

Don't compare a computer to the world either, they are not even close to being the same thing.

The only way I have compared the two (by the way, I stated "the world of computers" not "a computer") is by saying that the statement doesn't apply. Two dissimilar things will almost always have something in common. Pointing out the similarities are not a mistake either.

Flyte wrote:

DeltaFlyer wrote:

Again, quote me where I said that Java is completely portable. I said Java is portable, more so than C. Can you C fanboys not accept that one simple fact?

Code:

Java's main power comes from portability.

Please, read what I said to quote. Saying Bob's main attribute is that he is good at sports does not mean he is the best at sports.

Flyte wrote:

Code:

I attempt to choose my words carefully; however that will serve no purpose if someone is just going to amplify every adjective I use.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Ad_hominem_tu_quoque
Sad

Even in the very post I am quoting from, you bend my words.

Flyte wrote:

So it is called algorithm programming now? Couldn't think of another way to call it as to make a currency converter sound important? Or are we forgetting that if you were making any real algorithms you would cut out the middle man (the virtual machine) to process it faster?

The confusion you're having may be the result of my lack of definition of algorithm programming. To clarify:

I, personally, split programming into two sections: algorithm programming, and application programming. I define algorithm programming as programming involving large amounts of math and logic from the programmer's part. This kind of programming relates to problem-solving, such as finding the shortest distance on a graph, or finding the distance between two objects. The programs created are usually associated with a specific problem designed to be solved within a restricted amount of time.

The second, which I call application programming, is programming involving extensive lookup of documentations and design. Such programming rarely involves large amounts of math and logic, but more often innovation in design and an understanding of the capabilities of the language one is working with to understand the limits of those innovations.

Currency converters do not involve enough math to fit into my definition of algorithm programming as a multiplication is hardly problem solving.

Also, a good algorithm does not rely on the speed of the underlying platform it is executing on, but rather the efficiency of the algorithm it self.

Ran out of allowed quotes... More are coming, will post as soon as someone posts after this post.
_________________

Wow.... still working at 827... what's INCA thinking?
zomg l33t hax at this place (IE only). Over 150 people have used it, what are YOU waiting for?

Flyte
Peanuts!!!!

Reputation: 6

Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 1887
Location: Canada

Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 6:54 pm Post subject:

DeltaFlyer wrote:

Sorry, I don't see the words "invalid argument". I said Java isn't built for system interaction.

Stop being ignorant.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Style_over_substance_fallacy

DeltaFlyer wrote:

C and Java are related as they are both programming languages. Comparing a programming language to a piece of hardware is stupid.

DeltaFlyer wrote:

Please, read what I said to quote. Saying Bob's main attribute is that he is good at sports does not mean he is the best at sports.

Nor did I say C has the best portability, what I am saying is that Java relies on the portability of C. Read what I said.

DeltaFlyer wrote:

Even in the very post I am quoting from, you bend my words.

I am quoting exactly what you said.

DeltaFlyer wrote:

Also, a good algorithm does not rely on the speed of the underlying platform it is executing on, but rather the efficiency of the algorithm it self.

So a bruteforcing algorithm doesn't require speed of the underlying platform?

DeltaFlyer wrote:

Ran out of allowed quotes... More are coming, will post as soon as someone posts after this post.

I know it would be stupid to tell you to "give it up" because somebody in your position just won't shut up and admit that they are wrong. But here it is anyways:

Give it up.

DeltaFlyer
Grandmaster Cheater

Reputation: 0

Joined: 22 Jul 2006
Posts: 666

Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 7:12 pm Post subject:

Flyte wrote:

Stop being ignorant.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Style_over_substance_fallacy

Saying Java isn't built for system interaction is not saying the argument is invalid; it tells you WHY Java cannot alter the kernel.

Flyte wrote:

C and Java are related as they are both programming languages. Comparing a programming language to a piece of hardware is stupid.

The language was not compared to the hardware, the relationships between languages and the language and the hardware was being compared.

Flyte wrote:

Nor did I say C has the best portability, what I am saying is that Java relies on the portability of C. Read what I said.

You have implied that I stated Java is completely portable.

Flyte wrote:

4) Java is completely portable? Run it on a computer without an operating system. (Or even a toaster, lawl)

YOU read what you said.

Flyte wrote:

I am quoting exactly what you said.

Then I suggest that you read what you quoted. I ask for a quote of me saying Java is completely portable, you give me a quote of me saying Java's main power comes from portability.

Flyte wrote:

So a bruteforcing algorithm doesn't require speed of the underlying platform?

Brute-forcing is not problem-solving... it's... well... brute-forcing.

Flyte wrote:

I know it would be stupid to tell you to "give it up" because somebody in your position just won't shut up and admit that they are wrong. But here it is anyways:

Give it up.

I admit when I'm wrong when I feel I am wrong. At this moment, I feel none of you understands what I'm trying to say.

Still didn't have enough quotes to post the reply I had saved up responding to Chaos.
_________________

Wow.... still working at 827... what's INCA thinking?
zomg l33t hax at this place (IE only). Over 150 people have used it, what are YOU waiting for?

Flyte
Peanuts!!!!

Reputation: 6

Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 1887
Location: Canada

Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 7:23 pm Post subject:

DeltaFlyer wrote:

Brute-forcing is not problem-solving... it's... well... brute-forcing.

What about a brute forcer that requires a complex hash?

DeltaFlyer wrote:

Saying Java isn't built for system interaction is not saying the argument is invalid; it tells you WHY Java cannot alter the kernel.
-snip-
The language was not compared to the hardware, the relationships between languages and the language and the hardware was being compared.
-snip-
YOU read what you said.
-snip-
I admit when I'm wrong when I feel I am wrong. At this moment, I feel none of you understands what I'm trying to say.
-snip-
Still didn't have enough quotes to post the reply I had saved up responding to Chaos.

I am done arguing with you, I have defeated all your points and all you have to throw back at me are technicalities and ignorance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion

I will not be back to reply to your nonsense.

DeltaFlyer
Grandmaster Cheater

Reputation: 0

Joined: 22 Jul 2006
Posts: 666

Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 7:34 pm Post subject:

Flyte wrote:

DeltaFlyer wrote:

Brute-forcing is not problem-solving... it's... well... brute-forcing.

What about a brute forcer that requires a complex hash?

Most JVM's implement JIT compilation, which brings up repetitive tasks up to near native speed.

Flyte wrote:

You have defeated none of my points. Your original argument was based on the assumption that I have stated that "Java can do anything and is the best.", which I have not done.

Chaos_Blader wrote:

The argument or his point? It was a really weak argument to begin with, because it got greatly digressed from the main topic. The best language for bot creation. Java is most likely as good as PHP for bot creation.

I was not arguing for the best language for bot creation, it will be explained later in this post.

Java can make quite good bots actually. It bypassed a game's built-in protection (non-GG) where keybd_event and post/sendmessage APIs were blocked. Bad point is that Java cannot capture hotkeys so JNI must be needed for that functionality.

Chaos_Blader wrote:

Flash Actionscript 9 is opening millions of new possibilities.

papervision3d dot org

is all 3d and interactive. Plus its a million times more suitable and faster for the web.

Ok, I have to admit, Flash have improved a lot since last time I touched it. The papervision3D however, is still quite laggy, at least on my computer. It probably is restricted by the browser's sandbox. I'm not here to argue that Java is the best for everything, and the site have definitely given me some new insight into Flash.

Chaos_Blader wrote:

Java would be no use here. For the purpose of this topic Java is useless. You don't need portability. MS runs only on Windows. Im sure you are not going to be running the Bot on a web page.

For this situation C++ is better.

The OP have stated in the third post that he does not play MS. Java does not only run on a web page. Even if you're to run a bot in Java on a web page, it would not be allowed by the JVM as that would compromise security of the user's computer.

C++ would be a better choice if the OP does not care about portability. However, since the OP have not indicated his stand on portability, Java should not be ruled out.

Remember, I am not saying Java is the best language to bot with. I was merely responding to this:

blankrider wrote:

Java is NOT a botting language...

it makes for horrid bots because it doesn't use win32 api

Of course Java isn't a botting language, but neither is C++, so that could be ignored for this section.

My reply was mainly directed at the second sentence:

DeltaFlyer wrote:

A program does not need Win32 API to bot, especially one that is designed to be multi-platform.

Which is true.
_________________

Wow.... still working at 827... what's INCA thinking?
zomg l33t hax at this place (IE only). Over 150 people have used it, what are YOU waiting for?

ups2000ups
I post too much

Reputation: 0

Joined: 31 Jul 2006
Posts: 2471

Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 7:36 pm Post subject:

i cant see the problem lol all lq work good to make bots -.- and irl all lg is the same alll lg convert to assembler when they are done _________________ dont complain about my english... 1*1 = 2?

Flyte
Peanuts!!!!

Reputation: 6

Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 1887
Location: Canada

Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 7:39 pm Post subject:

Sorry, I had to pop back in to say this: ActiveX controls.

DeltaFlyer
Grandmaster Cheater

Reputation: 0

Joined: 22 Jul 2006
Posts: 666

Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 7:42 pm Post subject:

Flyte wrote:

Sorry, I had to pop back in to say this:

ActiveX controls.

Not secure and can't be run on anything other than IE, which goes back to the same problem.
_________________

Wow.... still working at 827... what's INCA thinking?
zomg l33t hax at this place (IE only). Over 150 people have used it, what are YOU waiting for?

Trow
Grandmaster Cheater

Reputation: 2

Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Posts: 957

Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 8:17 pm Post subject:

DeltaFlyer wrote:

Flyte wrote:

Sorry, I had to pop back in to say this:

ActiveX controls.

Not secure and can't be run on anything other than IE, which goes back to the same problem.

I thought at one point Delphi could load ActiveX controls and so could VB6
_________________

Get kidnapped often.

HomerSexual
Grandmaster Cheater Supreme

Reputation: 5

Joined: 03 Feb 2007
Posts: 1657

Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 8:53 pm Post subject:

they can how can you say c++ isn't a botting language? what bots aren't written in c++ \| asm (the nooby ones dont count) _________________

DeltaFlyer
Grandmaster Cheater

Reputation: 0

Joined: 22 Jul 2006
Posts: 666

Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:41 pm Post subject:

blankrider wrote:

they can

how can you say c++ isn't a botting language?

what bots aren't written in c++ | asm

(the nooby ones dont count)

C++ is not specifically designed for bot making therefore not a botting language; it's designed for making programs, therefore a programming language.

Autoit (example) is specifically designed to make bots, therefore a botting language; it's not designed for making programs, therefore not a programming language.

Clear?

blland wrote:

I thought at one point Delphi could load ActiveX controls and so could VB6

Yes, and the .net languages from MS, and probably more. However, The only reason I could think of that Flyte would bring up ActiveX is to counter my post: "You try putting a C++ program onto a web page viewable by all major web browsers." However, ActiveX is not viewable by all major web browsers.
_________________

Wow.... still working at 827... what's INCA thinking?
zomg l33t hax at this place (IE only). Over 150 people have used it, what are YOU waiting for?

Trow
Grandmaster Cheater

Reputation: 2

Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Posts: 957

Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 5:07 am Post subject:

DeltaFlyer wrote:

blankrider wrote:

they can

how can you say c++ isn't a botting language?

what bots aren't written in c++ | asm

(the nooby ones dont count)

blland wrote:

I thought at one point Delphi could load ActiveX controls and so could VB6

re: what you re:ed me: oh ok

re: about C++: I don't think C++ was developed with a specific aim so I think that's the reason why it can do everything in terms of ability but sucks at doing everything in terms of production speed.
_________________

Get kidnapped often.

Krayzee
Cheater

Reputation: 0

Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Posts: 25
Location: Satan's Server Room

Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 6:11 am Post subject:

wow. this is a really stupid argument, comparing ANY language for any reason is retarded. its like saying ice cream is better than a sausage, it all depends on the person, just like the languages depend on the purpose of your program, i know i dont have near as much knowledge in programming compared to all of you guys. but arguing about something like this i thought would be above you. C++ has its strong points and weak points, so does every other language.

HomerSexual
Grandmaster Cheater Supreme

Reputation: 5

Joined: 03 Feb 2007
Posts: 1657

Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 9:28 am Post subject:

Delta you keep bringing up technicalities your argument is flawed ActiveX can be run in programs btw >.> i have a laptop to fix though _________________

Display posts from previous:

	Cheat Engine Forum Index -> General programming	All times are GMT - 6 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next
Page 4 of 6

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum