Re: [GTALUG] "93% of Paint Splatters are Valid Perl Programs"

2019-04-15 Thread Alvin Starr via talk
ACH and Sigbovik seem to be a little like the ignobel prizes. https://www.improbable.com/ A fun read is a book called "A random walk through science". This kind of hearkens back to the days of comparisons of sendmail.cf files to modem line noise On 4/15/19 9:17 AM, D. Hugh Redelmeier via

Re: [GTALUG] "93% of Paint Splatters are Valid Perl Programs"

2019-04-15 Thread D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk
| From: Kevin Cozens via talk | Um... when was that published? It feels like an April fools joke to me. It's in the 2019 volume. And do read the footnotes. --- Talk Mailing List talk@gtalug.org https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [GTALUG] "93% of Paint Splatters are Valid Perl Programs"

2019-04-14 Thread Stewart Russell via talk
> > The pubdate is April 1st, but I think it highlights the weakness of all other languages *but* Perl ... --- Talk Mailing List talk@gtalug.org https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [GTALUG] "93% of Paint Splatters are Valid Perl Programs"

2019-04-14 Thread Kevin Cozens via talk
On 2019-04-14 10:07 a.m., D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk wrote: I found this worth reading. Um... when was that published? It feels like an April fools joke to me. -- Cheers! Kevin. http://www.ve3syb.ca/

[GTALUG] "93% of Paint Splatters are Valid Perl Programs"

2019-04-14 Thread D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk
I found this worth reading. --- Talk Mailing List talk@gtalug.org https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk