On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 02:10:11PM +0900, Joel Rees wrote:
Which is another way of saying that you want others to have already made
the mistakes for you.
No it isn't! Ponder why most people take their car to a mechanic for
servicing.
And you snipped:
As long as you recognize
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 10:53 PM, Chris Bannister
cbannis...@slingshot.co.nz wrote:
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 02:10:11PM +0900, Joel Rees wrote:
Which is another way of saying that you want others to have already made
the mistakes for you.
No it isn't! Ponder why most people take their
On 12/10/14 04:12, Peter Zoeller wrote:
But the nice
thing is shell scripting is simplistic easy to learn and understand.
I refer the audience to David A. Wheeler's essay[1] on how to handle
filenames correctly in shell scripts, and to the bug report that he
filed against POSIX.1-2008[2] on
On Sb, 11 oct 14, 21:40:49, Steve Litt wrote:
From my viewpoint, shellscripts were never intended to be big, huge
programs. To me, they just glue together commands, and have a few
rudimentary branching and looping constructs.
Isn't that like buying IKEA furniture, but when you get home you
On 10/12/2014 at 10:07 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Sb, 11 oct 14, 21:40:49, Steve Litt wrote:
From my viewpoint, shellscripts were never intended to be big,
huge programs. To me, they just glue together commands, and have a
few rudimentary branching and looping constructs.
Isn't that
On Du, 12 oct 14, 10:30:52, The Wanderer wrote:
On 10/12/2014 at 10:07 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
Any program that requires additional scripting just to get it running
is insufficiently advanced.
(you can quote me on that)
Part of the tradeoff for power is responsibility - both in
On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 09:33:43 +0100
Martin Read zen75...@zen.co.uk wrote:
On 12/10/14 04:12, Peter Zoeller wrote:
But the nice
thing is shell scripting is simplistic easy to learn and understand.
I refer the audience to David A. Wheeler's essay[1] on how to handle
filenames correctly in
On 10/12/2014 at 01:42 PM, Steve Litt wrote:
On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 09:33:43 +0100 Martin Read zen75...@zen.co.uk
wrote:
On 12/10/14 04:12, Peter Zoeller wrote:
But the nice thing is shell scripting is simplistic easy to learn
and understand.
I refer the audience to David A. Wheeler's
On Sun, 12 Oct 2014, Steve Litt wrote:
This essay practically screams out for somebody to write a C program
that takes an argument of an arbitrary string, finds all files in a
directory, and returns a long string with those files separated by the
arbitrary string.
You seem to be looking for
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Sb, 11 oct 14, 21:40:49, Steve Litt wrote:
From my viewpoint, shellscripts were never intended to be big, huge
programs. To me, they just glue together commands, and have a few
rudimentary branching and looping constructs.
Isn't that like buying IKEA furniture, but
On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 17:07:01 +0300
Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sb, 11 oct 14, 21:40:49, Steve Litt wrote:
From my viewpoint, shellscripts were never intended to be big, huge
programs. To me, they just glue together commands, and have a few
rudimentary branching and
Don Armstrong d...@debian.org writes:
On Sun, 12 Oct 2014, Steve Litt wrote:
This essay practically screams out for somebody to write a C program
that takes an argument of an arbitrary string, finds all files in a
directory, and returns a long string with those files separated by the
On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 11:16:54 -0700
Don Armstrong d...@debian.org wrote:
On Sun, 12 Oct 2014, Steve Litt wrote:
This essay practically screams out for somebody to write a C program
that takes an argument of an arbitrary string, finds all files in a
directory, and returns a long string with
2014/10/12 23:07 Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com:
On Sb, 11 oct 14, 21:40:49, Steve Litt wrote:
From my viewpoint, shellscripts were never intended to be big, huge
programs. To me, they just glue together commands, and have a few
rudimentary branching and looping constructs.
2014/10/13 2:14 Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com:
On Du, 12 oct 14, 10:30:52, The Wanderer wrote:
On 10/12/2014 at 10:07 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
Any program that requires additional scripting just to get it running
is insufficiently advanced.
(you can quote me on that)
2014/10/13 2:45 Steve Litt sl...@troubleshooters.com:
On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 09:33:43 +0100
Martin Read zen75...@zen.co.uk wrote:
On 12/10/14 04:12, Peter Zoeller wrote:
But the nice
thing is shell scripting is simplistic easy to learn and understand.
I refer the audience to David A.
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 07:53:03AM +0900, Joel Rees wrote:
2014/10/13 2:14 Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com:
On Du, 12 oct 14, 10:30:52, The Wanderer wrote:
On 10/12/2014 at 10:07 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
Any program that requires additional scripting just to get it running
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Chris Bannister
cbannis...@slingshot.co.nz wrote:
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 07:53:03AM +0900, Joel Rees wrote:
2014/10/13 2:14 Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com:
On Du, 12 oct 14, 10:30:52, The Wanderer wrote:
On 10/12/2014 at 10:07 AM, Andrei POPESCU
On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 19:05:19 -0400
Doug dmcgarr...@optonline.net wrote:
On 10/11/2014 05:28 PM, Steve Litt wrote:
On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 21:21:14 +0300
Daemontools runscripts are incredibly simple shellscripts, that I'm
sure you could write no sweat except in very wierd edge cases.
Here's
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 09:40:49PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
Now that I've said that, you can accomplish some pretty incredible
things by gluing a few commands together. I wrote the better half of a
http log evaluation program using a shellscript gluing together grep,
cut, and awk, and piped
Hi Steve:
I agree that shell scripts are simplistic and not meant for fancy
programs although it could be done, just not productive. But the nice
thing is shell scripting is simplistic easy to learn and understand.
Sure beats the days when I wrote code in Assembler, Cobol, Fortran, PL1,
21 matches
Mail list logo
