On Tue, 17 May 2005 15:21:04 +0200, Thierry LACOSTE
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I found Adam's criticism of perl quite convincing.
>What language(s) do you use and/or recommend
>for system administration?
>
>Regards,
>Thierry.
Adam is not wrong but Nick Holland is right. Every language has both
f
On Tue, May 17, 2005 at 03:21:04PM +0200, Thierry LACOSTE wrote:
> I found Adam's criticism of perl quite convincing.
> What language(s) do you use and/or recommend
> for system administration?
Good old /bin/sh + friends from /bin and /usr/bin.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I found Adam's criticism of perl quite convincing.
What language(s) do you use and/or recommend
for system administration?
Regards,
Thierry.
On Sun, 15 May 2005 13:53:33 -0500, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>there are times when it's actually worth the effort to ...
>Oh yes. Now, do you determine whether the trip is worthwhile
>by examining hammers or by examining the nails?
>(Language zealots all seem to have the problem
>of looking onl
Are you saying that instead of distinguishing between
foo and my foo,
the distinction should be between
everybody's foo and foo
for some spelling of everybody's
As Nick points out, I've been feeding the flames when I should be doing
other things. I'm going to try one last time to offer a word to t
Are you saying that instead of distinguishing between
foo and my foo,
the distinction should be between
everybody's foo and foo
for some spelling of everybody's
?
>- --- Original Message --- -
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Sun, 15 May 2005 14:43:00
>
>On Mo
Big rule of scripting: More work gets done by writing code than by
arguing about scripting languages.
Pick a language. Learn it. Work with it. Implement some tasks in it.
If you are satisfied with it, good. If not, try some other language.
You ain't marrying it, if it doesn't work out, move o
On May 15, 2005, at 2:30 PM, Adam wrote:
I never said otherwise. I said you can have optional args in lots of
other languages too, as Jason seemed to think @_ allows optional args,
while languages using named args don't.
What I was saying is that in almost every Perl program I've written or
read,
lto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
J.C. Roberts
Sent: Sunday, May 15, 2005 8:21 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: misc@openbsd.org
Subject: Re: beginner, intermediate, and advanced scripting
On Sun, 15 May 2005 05:32:07 -0500, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>To add to your excellent analogy with hammers,
On Mon, 16 May 2005 01:05:28 +0900
Joel Rees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The bug/feature is that you can't declare variables unless you
> declare them either "local" (which is usually not what you want) or
> "my" (which _is_ what you usually want). The buggy aspects of this
> feature are mostly r
On Sun, 15 May 2005 11:59:04 +0200
Marc Espie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 12:49:34AM -0400, Adam wrote:
> > First of all, that's not a benefit. In most languages you can have
> > optional arguments to functions, without forcing all functions to
> > take only a single arra
Thank you all once again for your help for I am now a little more
informed, and I know that I do not have to buy a book just yet.
I wonder how similar perl is to c++? Since my teacher in university
told me when you learn one language you know them all (not litteraly).
But I guess I'll find out from
On Mon, 16 May 2005 01:13:03 +0900, Joel Rees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> I'm quite sure Paul Graham would very
>> happily tell you all the logical reasons why the end result would
>> eventually be a dialect of LISP. ;-)
>
>And perl is a dialect of LISP, isn't it?
>
>:-/
>
I would bet said se
I'm quite sure Paul Graham would very
happily tell you all the logical reasons why the end result would
eventually be a dialect of LISP. ;-)
And perl is a dialect of LISP, isn't it?
:-/
--
Joel Rees
(A FORTH dreamer, imprisoned in a Java world)
{ promote my $language;
redo;
}
What about declaring a variable in the block it's being used is so
difficult for you? It's pretty simple... define a variable in the
main namespace, it's a global. Define it in a block, it's lexical.
This is a bit of an oversimplification, but
Uh, tha
On Sun, 15 May 2005 05:32:07 -0500, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>To add to your excellent analogy with hammers,
>Do you drive across town to get that one best hammer to drive one nail?
>
Oddly enough there are times when it's actually worth the effort to go
across town to pick up a hammer better s
ubject: Re: beginner, intermediate, and advanced scripting
On Sat, 14 May 2005 23:39:11 -0700, Eugene Hercun
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Thank you for your responses. Sorry I could not reply sooner since I
>went to work before I posted this e-mail. Anyway, I might have missed
>
On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 12:49:34AM -0400, Adam wrote:
> First of all, that's not a benefit. In most languages you can have
> optional arguments to functions, without forcing all functions to take
> only a single array of scalar variables.
You know, maybe you should read perl documentation.
In pe
On 2005-05-14 23:39:11 -0700, Eugene Hercun wrote:
> Thank you for your responses. Sorry I could not reply sooner since I
> went to work before I posted this e-mail. Anyway, I might have missed
> it, but did anyone recommend a book regarding scripting for BSD with
> perl?
You don't need that. Per
On Sat, 14 May 2005 23:39:11 -0700, Eugene Hercun
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Thank you for your responses. Sorry I could not reply sooner since I
>went to work before I posted this e-mail. Anyway, I might have missed
>it, but did anyone recommend a book regarding scripting for BSD with
>perl?
>I
Thank you for your responses. Sorry I could not reply sooner since I
went to work before I posted this e-mail. Anyway, I might have missed
it, but did anyone recommend a book regarding scripting for BSD with
perl?
I think were getting a little bit off topic in the last few posts... =)
Eugene
On Sun, 15 May 2005 00:20:54 -0400
Jason Dixon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What about declaring a variable in the block it's being used is so
> difficult for you? It's pretty simple... define a variable in the
> main namespace, it's a global. Define it in a block, it's lexical.
Uh, that's not
On May 14, 2005, at 11:32 PM, Adam wrote:
Maybe you like to make rediculous assumptions for no reason. I don't
recall saying perl's flexibility was bad, or is this a canned response
you use anytime anyone critisizes perl, without bothering to read what
they said?
I was simply countering the "Perl
On Sat, 14 May 2005 22:43:24 -0400
Jason Dixon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On May 14, 2005, at 10:19 PM, Adam wrote:
>
> > Because every language has PCRE, its not really a selling point for
> > perl. Python, ruby and pike are all just as good at "mangling
> > text". And perl's OO support is aw
On May 14, 2005, at 10:19 PM, Adam wrote:
Because every language has PCRE, its not really a selling point for
perl. Python, ruby and pike are all just as good at "mangling text".
And perl's OO support is awkward and ugly, although you could make the
argument that the rest of perl is too.
To each h
On Sat, 14 May 2005 17:57:19 -0400
Jason Dixon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Perl is incredibly good at mangling text. Because much of shell
> scripting is input/output (pipes) manipulation, you might as well use
> a language that has all of that plus excellent built-in regex.
> Considering tha
On May 14, 2005, at 4:24 PM, Eugene Hercun wrote:
Anyway, I was curious, the "UNIX System" book mentioned that Perl is a
good programming language to use for scripting, but it does not
explain why.
What are some good books for beginner through advanced scripting? I
poked around amazon.com and the u
It's a good scripting language because of how well regular expressions
are
integrated into the language. It's also easy to pick up and use,
because
it's pretty lenient in specific syntax.
The lenient syntax can also be seen as a detriment. Depends on how well
you intuit the context of the people
On May 14, 2005, at 4:24 PM, Eugene Hercun wrote:
Hello everyone,
I was reading the "UNIX System Administration Handbook" the other day,
and I really liked the idea of programming your own scheduled
automated tasks. Mr. Holland made a very good point regarding this
issue
"Ok, your computer is doing
I'd recommend this ebook when it comes to learning perl:
http://juerd.nl/elsewhere.plp?href=http://learn.perl.org/library/beginning_perl/
It'll get you started with perl and programing in general, the rest
you can learn by reading other peoples' scripts.
Hello everyone,
I was reading the "UNIX System Administration Handbook" the other day,
and I really liked the idea of programming your own scheduled
automated tasks. Mr. Holland made a very good point regarding this
issue
"Ok, your computer is doing some "inefficient work", but that's what
compute
It's a good scripting language because of how well regular expressions are
integrated into the language. It's also easy to pick up and use, because
it's pretty lenient in specific syntax. I can't recommend a book though, as
most of what I know of perl has been from reading other peoples scripts and
32 matches
Mail list logo
