On 4/8/23 08:19, Emanuel Berg wrote:
Tom Dial wrote:
Look at the use of parentheses in Lisp [...]
I have thought about that - is Lisp possible without them?
But how do you then know priority? I'm sure someone tried
to get rid of them, but how?
Its quite a few years since I had anything
On 08/04/2023 23:20, Greg Wooledge wrote:
One of the basic goals of structured programming languages was to
eliminate reliance on line numbers -- which were the hallmark of many
other languages in use at the time.
or reliance on labels (represented by numbers) for goto destination as
in early
Andy Smith writes:
>
> It is almost as if one small set of metrics aren't enough to decide,
> for everyone, in every case, which language should be used!
>
> Similarly, the idea posted in this thread to objectively quantify
> every feature a language can possibly have and then see which one
>
Hello,
On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 08:20:36PM +0200, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> 1.00 is best, higher numbers indicate wastefulness.
>
> C has 1.00 for energy consumption and for processing time.
> For memory needs it's at rank 3 with 1.17.
> Perl has 79.58 for energy (rank 27 of 27), 65.79 for time
rhkramer wrote:
>> I was never a fan of Dijkstra's "Go To Statement Considered
>> Harmful" and perceive modern spaghetti inheritence as more
>> obscure than any goto noodling.
>
> Good point!
But that's not modern :)
--
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal
On Saturday, April 08, 2023 01:44:48 PM Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> I was never a fan of Dijkstra's "Go To Statement Considered Harmful"
> and perceive modern spaghetti inheritence as more obscure than any goto
> noodling.
Good point!
--
rhk
(sig revised 20230312 -- modified first paragraph, some
Hi,
Greg Wooledge wrote:
> Yes, "structured programming" was the term used. Structured
> programming uses functions, while loops, if/then/else statements, and
> so on, instead of "GOTO 1230" type commands, to control a program's flow.
Like with Rocky Mountain BASIC of HP 9000 machines in
> Yes, "structured programming" was the term used.
> Structured programming uses functions, while loops,
> if/then/else statements, and so on, instead of "GOTO 1230"
> type commands, to control a program's flow.
>
> One of the basic goals of structured programming languages
> was to eliminate
Greg Wooledge wrote:
> Yes, "structured programming" was the term used.
> Structured programming uses functions, while loops,
> if/then/else statements, and so on, instead of "GOTO 1230"
> type commands, to control a program's flow.
>
> One of the basic goals of structured programming languages
>
On Sat, Apr 08, 2023 at 10:23:15AM -0400, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> My first language was Algol, a language that wrote out keywords and such so
> that it was easier to understand (for me) what a given program was doing. It
> was also structured (if that is the right word), having things like
davidson wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Apr 2023 Emanuel Berg wrote:
>
>> Tom Dial wrote:
>>
> Look at the use of parentheses in Lisp [...]
I have thought about that - is Lisp possible without them?
But how do you then know priority? I'm sure someone tried
to get rid of them, but how?
Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> Here are three more data points.
>
>* Emacs - 41 CVEs since 2000 [1]
>* Vi - 61 CVEs since 1999 [2]
>* Vim - 656 CVEs since 2001 [3]
>
> I'm not sure how many CVEs overlap for Vim due to Vi.
Hm ... what does this stat indicate? :O
Haha why do Vim has so many?
Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> Here are three more data points.
>>
>>* Emacs - 41 CVEs since 2000 [1]
>>* Vi - 61 CVEs since 1999 [2]
>>* Vim - 656 CVEs since 2001 [3]
>>
>> I'm not sure how many CVEs overlap for Vim due to Vi.
>
> I don't know what the number of CVEs tells us about
> a
Celejar wrote:
>> I agree but I think maybe the success of Python, and its
>> development speed, is actually because of some of that
>> rigidness, yes, including the whitespace lack of freedom.
>
> I'm no great programmer, and many posters in this thread are
> certainly far more proficient than
On Sat, 8 Apr 2023 Emanuel Berg wrote:
Tom Dial wrote:
Look at the use of parentheses in Lisp [...]
I have thought about that - is Lisp possible without them?
But how do you then know priority? I'm sure someone tried
to get rid of them, but how?
Its quite a few years since I had anything
debian-user wrote:
> But cropping and ignoring the actual point of Stefan's mail
> rather misses the point and insults him.
Those don't work on him anyway :)
--
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal
Greg Wooledge wrote:
> The word "via" appears in all three of your selections.
> That makes me think that the web site is using some kind of
> a "close-enough match" heuristic, and is (unhelpfully)
> matching "via" as close enough to "vim".
It's called the typographic attack vector ...
--
Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> The Vim folks had a bad week this week:
> https://ubuntu.com/security/notices/USN-5995-1 . There were
> 30 CVEs fixed this week.
What's the deal with that LOL :)
--
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal
Tom Dial wrote:
>>> Look at the use of parentheses in Lisp [...]
>>>
>> I have thought about that - is Lisp possible without them?
>> But how do you then know priority? I'm sure someone tried
>> to get rid of them, but how?
>
> Its quite a few years since I had anything to do with Lisp,
> and
On Saturday, April 08, 2023 09:55:14 AM Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Okay, can you boil it down to some one, two, maybe three main
> things that can answer the question why these languages have
> taken the different directions they have taken?
I think that in some | many cases, especially in the early
Tom Dial wrote:
>>> Look at the use of parentheses in Lisp [...]
>>
>> I have thought about that - is Lisp possible without them?
>> But how do you then know priority? I'm sure someone tried
>> to get rid of them, but how?
>
> Its quite a few years since I had anything to do with Lisp,
> and even
Joel Roth wrote:
> There is a new object system being cooked up, based on
> decades of experience with OO in perl and other languages.
>
> There is already more than enough OO goodness for me to get
> my work done :-)
Guys, word on the street the former OO guys at C++ don't speak
of OO anymore,
Eduard Bloch wrote:
> I don't think so, Sir! Python has certain advantages but the
> "meaningful whitespace" is IMHO not one of them.
>
> That said, I have been an active Perl user ~20y ago
My rule is a couple of weeks is enough to get "damaged" from
it, some of that damage is good to have tho
davidson wrote:
>>> Here's a bash version. It's not fast, but at least it
>>> doesn't invoke perl repeatedly. (If you're going to invoke
>>> perl *at all* you should simply rewrite the whole thing in
>>> perl, IMHO, or at worst have a short sh script that pipes
>>> file's output to one perl
Greg Wooledge wrote:
> I am surprised this thread has not started
> a mini-flame war.
We are working on it ...
>>>
>>> Maybe i can help by stating that Perl and Python are among
>>> the largest resource hogs known in the world of languages.
>>
>> What, how do they know that,
Michel Verdier wrote:
> #!/usr/bin/perl -w
>
> use strict;
>
> # echo $PATH | tr ':' '\n' | perl -MFile::Slurp -ne
> 'chomp;@e=read_dir($_,prefix=>1); print map "$_\n",@e'|xargs file|perl -pe
> 's/\S+\s+//'|grep -v 'symbolic link'|perl -pe 's/, dynamically
> linked.+//'|sort|uniq -c|sort -rn
>
On Sat, Apr 08, 2023 at 02:57:42PM +0200, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Thomas Schmitt wrote:
>
> >>> I am surprised this thread has not started
> >>> a mini-flame war.
> >>
> >> We are working on it ...
> >
> > Maybe i can help by stating that Perl and Python are among
> > the largest resource hogs
Thomas Schmitt wrote:
>>> I am surprised this thread has not started
>>> a mini-flame war.
>>
>> We are working on it ...
>
> Maybe i can help by stating that Perl and Python are among
> the largest resource hogs known in the world of languages.
What, how do they know that, they do the same
tomas wrote:
>> Put it this way, a novice Python programmer can do more in
>> Python than the novice Lisp programmer can do in Lisp, or,
>> if you will, the same in less time.
>
> I've seen people cutting off part of a door with a bread knife.
>
> If you measure a tool by what a novice can
On Mon, 3 Apr 2023 Michel Verdier wrote:
Le 3 avril 2023 Greg Wooledge a écrit :
Here's a bash version. It's not fast, but at least it doesn't invoke
perl repeatedly. (If you're going to invoke perl *at all* you should
simply rewrite the whole thing in perl, IMHO, or at worst have a short
sh
On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 01:39:27PM +0200, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 01:37:31PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
> > Greg Wooledge (12023-04-05):
> > > bash has that, too -- you just have to enable it (shopt -s globstar),
> > > as it's not enabled by default.
> >
> > Ah, bash
to...@tuxteam.de (12023-04-05):
> It does have <(...), too.
<(…) and >(…) are quite common, =(…) is significantly rarer.
Regards,
--
Nicolas George
On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 01:37:31PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
> Greg Wooledge (12023-04-05):
> > bash has that, too -- you just have to enable it (shopt -s globstar),
> > as it's not enabled by default.
>
> Ah, bash has recursive globbing, that is good to know. It does not have
> glob
Greg Wooledge (12023-04-05):
> bash has that, too -- you just have to enable it (shopt -s globstar),
> as it's not enabled by default.
Ah, bash has recursive globbing, that is good to know. It does not have
glob qualifiers nor temp file process substitution, AFAICS, though.
Glob qualifiers is
On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 12:01:50PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
> 2. If you are relying on nonstandard shell constructs, then go directly
> for zsh and use recursive globbing and glob patterns.
bash has that, too -- you just have to enable it (shopt -s globstar),
as it's not enabled by default.
Michael (12023-04-05):
> out of curiosity, why not omit xargs altogether and do someting like:
>
> #!/bin/bash
> [...]
>printf '%s\0' "$d"/*
> done |
>while read -r -d '' line; do
> [...]
>
> or do i miss something?
1. Your script will execute the command once per argument, xargs will
On Wednesday, 5 April 2023 11:48:35 CEST, Michael wrote:
or do i miss something?
yes i did!!!
sorry, please ignore my previous post!
greetings...
On Monday, 3 April 2023 22:03:59 CEST, Greg Wooledge wrote:
With this option, you can supply a stream of NUL-delimited filenames
to xargs -0, and process them safely. No explosions will occur, no matter
what filenames are passed.
out of curiosity, why not omit xargs altogether and do someting
On Mon, 03 Apr 2023 02:15:10 +0200
Emanuel Berg wrote:
...
> I agree but I think maybe the success of Python, and its
> development speed, is actually because of some of that
> rigidness, yes, including the whitespace lack of freedom.
I'm no great programmer, and many posters in this thread
Apr 4, 2023, 13:40 by a...@strugglers.net:
> Turns out though ChatGPT is--as virtually all ML code--written
> in Python, that's at least according to Wikipedia and not too
> surprising. There you go. Depending on what you make of it,
> there may not come much after Python
>
I see, thanks.
On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 1:37 PM Greg Wooledge wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 06:29:50PM +0100, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote:
> > But cropping and ignoring the actual point of Stefan's mail rather
> > misses the point and insults him. For example, three CVEs chosen at
> > random from the
On Tue 04 Apr 2023 at 13:37:27 (-0400), Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 06:29:50PM +0100, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote:
> > But cropping and ignoring the actual point of Stefan's mail rather
> > misses the point and insults him. For example, three CVEs chosen at
> > random from
On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 06:29:50PM +0100, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote:
> But cropping and ignoring the actual point of Stefan's mail rather
> misses the point and insults him. For example, three CVEs chosen at
> random from the 'vim' list:
>
> CVE-2010-3481 Multiple SQL injection
Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 9:46 AM Stefan Monnier
> wrote:
> >
> > > Here are three more data points.
> > >
> > >* Emacs - 41 CVEs since 2000 [1]
> > >* Vi - 61 CVEs since 1999 [2]
> > >* Vim - 656 CVEs since 2001 [3]
> > >
> > > I'm not sure how many CVEs
On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 9:46 AM Stefan Monnier wrote:
>
> > Here are three more data points.
> >
> >* Emacs - 41 CVEs since 2000 [1]
> >* Vi - 61 CVEs since 1999 [2]
> >* Vim - 656 CVEs since 2001 [3]
> >
> > I'm not sure how many CVEs overlap for Vim due to Vi.
>
> I don't know what
> Here are three more data points.
>
>* Emacs - 41 CVEs since 2000 [1]
>* Vi - 61 CVEs since 1999 [2]
>* Vim - 656 CVEs since 2001 [3]
>
> I'm not sure how many CVEs overlap for Vim due to Vi.
I don't know what the number of CVEs tells us about a project, but the
above additionally
Hello,
On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 05:35:04AM +0200, local10 wrote:
> Apr 4, 2023, 00:16 by in...@dataswamp.org:
> > Andy Smith wrote:
> >
> >> The argument being responded to is roughly that "a popular
> >> AI coding assistant is written in Python, and Python is
> >> a Turing-complete language,
On Mon, Apr 3, 2023 at 1:31 PM Emanuel Berg wrote:
>
> Jeffrey Walton wrote:
>
> >> I saw many commands in /bin and /usr/bin are written by
> >> perl. is perl still the first choice for sysadmin on linux?
> >
> > I am surprised this thread has not started a mini-flame war.
>
> We are working on
Apr 4, 2023, 00:16 by in...@dataswamp.org:
> Andy Smith wrote:
>
>> The argument being responded to is roughly that "a popular
>> AI coding assistant is written in Python, and Python is
>> a Turing-complete language, therefore there doesn't need to
>> be any programming language other than
On 4/2/23 18:15, Emanuel Berg wrote:
David Christensen wrote:
Look at the use of parentheses in Lisp [...]
I have thought about that - is Lisp possible without them?
But how do you then know priority? I'm sure someone tried to
get rid of them, but how?
Its quite a few years since I had
Andy Smith wrote:
> The argument being responded to is roughly that "a popular
> AI coding assistant is written in Python, and Python is
> a Turing-complete language, therefore there doesn't need to
> be any programming language other than Python."
AIs will write AIs will write AIs. Much better
Can't resist adding my 2c
On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 11:20:26PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> Hallo,
> * Emanuel Berg [Mon, Apr 03 2023, 02:15:10AM]:
>
> > > The reason Perl gives you more than one way to do anything
> > > is this: I truly believe computer programmers want to be
> > > creative, and
Hallo,
* Emanuel Berg [Mon, Apr 03 2023, 02:15:10AM]:
> > The reason Perl gives you more than one way to do anything
> > is this: I truly believe computer programmers want to be
> > creative, and they may have many different reasons for
> > wanting to write code a particular way. What you choose
On 4/3/23 13:03, Greg Wooledge wrote:
On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 12:50:02PM -0700, David Christensen wrote:
On 4/3/23 11:47, Greg Wooledge wrote:
Might be cleaner just to rewrite it from scratch. Especially since
it mixes multiple invocations of perl together with (unsafe!) xargs and
other shell
On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 12:50:02PM -0700, David Christensen wrote:
> On 4/3/23 11:47, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > Might be cleaner just to rewrite it from scratch. Especially since
> > it mixes multiple invocations of perl together with (unsafe!) xargs and
> > other shell commands
>
>
> Please
On 4/3/23 11:47, Greg Wooledge wrote:
Might be cleaner just to rewrite it from scratch. Especially since
it mixes multiple invocations of perl together with (unsafe!) xargs and
other shell commands
Please clarify "unsafe" and describe "safe" alternative(s).
David
On 4/3/23 10:58, Emanuel Berg wrote:
David Christensen wrote:
# echo $PATH | tr ':' '\n' | perl -MFile::Slurp -ne
'chomp;@e=read_dir($_,prefix=>1); print map "$_\n",@e'|xargs
file|perl -pe 's/\S+\s+//'|grep -v 'symbolic link'|perl -pe
's/, dynamically linked.+//'|sort|uniq -c|sort
Le 3 avril 2023 Greg Wooledge a écrit :
> Here's a bash version. It's not fast, but at least it doesn't invoke
> perl repeatedly. (If you're going to invoke perl *at all* you should
> simply rewrite the whole thing in perl, IMHO, or at worst have a short
> sh script that pipes file's output to
On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 07:58:03PM +0200, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> David Christensen wrote:
>
> > # echo $PATH | tr ':' '\n' | perl -MFile::Slurp -ne
> >'chomp;@e=read_dir($_,prefix=>1); print map "$_\n",@e'|xargs
> >file|perl -pe 's/\S+\s+//'|grep -v 'symbolic link'|perl -pe
> >'s/,
Le 3 avril 2023 Emanuel Berg a écrit :
> Michel Verdier wrote:
>
>>> I'm still so impressed by this, I tried to run this but it
>>> seems I lack the Slurp module?
>>
>> apt-get install libfile-slurp-perl
>
> Merci :)
>
> Indeed, works!
>
> Okay, forget about the function/script then, I have it
Hi,
Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> > I am surprised this thread has not started a mini-flame war.
Emanuel Berg wrote:
> We are working on it ...
Maybe i can help by stating that Perl and Python are among the largest
resource hogs known in the world of languages.
Michel Verdier wrote:
>> I'm still so impressed by this, I tried to run this but it
>> seems I lack the Slurp module?
>
> apt-get install libfile-slurp-perl
Merci :)
Indeed, works!
Okay, forget about the function/script then, I have it and it
works :)
--
underground experts united
Le 3 avril 2023 Emanuel Berg a écrit :
> I'm still so impressed by this, I tried to run this but it
> seems I lack the Slurp module?
apt-get install libfile-slurp-perl
David Christensen wrote:
> # echo $PATH | tr ':' '\n' | perl -MFile::Slurp -ne
>'chomp;@e=read_dir($_,prefix=>1); print map "$_\n",@e'|xargs
>file|perl -pe 's/\S+\s+//'|grep -v 'symbolic link'|perl -pe
>'s/, dynamically linked.+//'|sort|uniq -c|sort -rn
I'm still so impressed by
On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 12:36:51PM -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 2, 2023 at 4:59 AM wrote:
> >
> > I saw many commands in /bin and /usr/bin are written by perl.
> > is perl still the first choice for sysadmin on linux?
>
> I am surprised this thread has not started a mini-flame war.
debian-user wrote:
> Ah no, that one's easy to answer - vi is what's guaranteed
> to be installed everywhere, so vi it is. And I probably only
> use a tenth of its features.
But Emacs is maximalist, as is Lisp.
We want everything!
--
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal
Michel Verdier wrote:
>> Used it at their 21-23 versions. It's not editor, it's
>> really os and in this os best mail/news reader.
>
> Gnus rules!
Gnus is to Emacs users
what Emacs is to computer users.
https://dataswamp.org/~incal/figures/gnus/gnus-gmane.png
--
underground experts united
Le 3 avril 2023 Stanislav Vlasov a écrit :
> Used it at their 21-23 versions. It's not editor, it's really os and
> in this os best mail/news reader.
Gnus rules ! And Org too :)
Jeffrey Walton wrote:
>> I saw many commands in /bin and /usr/bin are written by
>> perl. is perl still the first choice for sysadmin on linux?
>
> I am surprised this thread has not started a mini-flame war.
We are working on it ...
> About the best you can say is, Perl is one of the more
>
Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 2, 2023 at 4:59 AM wrote:
> >
> > I saw many commands in /bin and /usr/bin are written by perl.
> > is perl still the first choice for sysadmin on linux?
>
> I am surprised this thread has not started a mini-flame war.
Me too, but I'm pleasantly surprised
2023-04-03 21:36 GMT+05:00, Jeffrey Walton :
> Next, you might ask which is the best editor to use on Unix & Linux.
> That should really stir the pot :) Emacs for the win!
Emacs will not win, because this OS does not have good editor even
with M-x viper :-)
Used it at their 21-23 versions. It's
2023-04-03 18:31 GMT+05:00, Vincent Lefevre :
> On 2023-04-03 11:48:42 +0500, Stanislav Vlasov wrote:
>> And I saw perl5 scripts from past (about 5.6 or lower), which can't
>> run on perl5 from current (5.22 or so at the moment).
>
> I would say that's quite rare (or these scripts were using
>
On Sun, Apr 2, 2023 at 4:59 AM wrote:
>
> I saw many commands in /bin and /usr/bin are written by perl.
> is perl still the first choice for sysadmin on linux?
I am surprised this thread has not started a mini-flame war.
About the best you can say is, Perl is one of the more popular
scripting
On 2023-04-03 11:48:42 +0500, Stanislav Vlasov wrote:
> And I saw perl5 scripts from past (about 5.6 or lower), which can't
> run on perl5 from current (5.22 or so at the moment).
I would say that's quite rare (or these scripts were using
experimental features). I started with perl 5.000 in early
Le 3 avril 2023 Stanislav Vlasov a écrit :
> For short, simple and selfdocumented scripts using perl is a best way,
> but for something more complicated... Only if can't use something
> other.
They push java for the same reason, a false idea of simplicity with
OO. Remember we are speaking about
tomas wrote:
>> Put it this way, a novice Python programmer can do more in
>> Python than the novice Lisp programmer can do in Lisp, or,
>> if you will, the same in less time.
>
> I've seen people cutting off part of a door with
> a bread knife.
But that is using a poor tool for the job, here we
пн, 3 апр. 2023 г. в 12:29, David Christensen :
> On 4/2/23 23:48, Stanislav Vlasov wrote:
> > пн, 3 апр. 2023 г. в 09:23, :
> >> I think python3 is much different to python2, but it's still naming as
> >> python.
> >
> > Not so much different as perl5 vs raku. I'm not a programmer, but can
> >
Le 3 avril 2023 David Christensen a écrit :
> documentation have improved. I believe all of my production Perl scripts are
> I/O bound, not CPU or memory bound.
I second. I made some python scripts which perform almost same as perl ones,
on similar tasks, but with more memory needs for python.
On 4/2/23 23:48, Stanislav Vlasov wrote:
пн, 3 апр. 2023 г. в 09:23, :
I think python3 is much different to python2, but it's still naming as
python.
Not so much different as perl5 vs raku. I'm not a programmer, but can
write large (more than 10kB) scripth, which can run with python2 or
пн, 3 апр. 2023 г. в 09:23, :
> I think python3 is much different to python2, but it's still naming as
> python.
Not so much different as perl5 vs raku. I'm not a programmer, but can
write large (more than 10kB) scripth, which can run with python2 or
python3 on different systems.
And I saw perl5
On 03/04/2023 12:43, Andy Smith wrote:
Hello,
On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 12:23:19PM +0800, cor...@free.fr wrote:
I am just not sure, why perl6 is named to raku?
Because Perl 5 still exists and is still seeing new releases, and
what is now Raku is a completely different language, so there is no
Hello,
On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 12:23:19PM +0800, cor...@free.fr wrote:
> I am just not sure, why perl6 is named to raku?
Because Perl 5 still exists and is still seeing new releases, and
what is now Raku is a completely different language, so there is no
prospect of Perl 5 ceasing to be
On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 05:44:31AM +0200, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> David Christensen wrote:
>
> > Code that writes code is a very useful technique, and I use
> > it. Whitespace as syntax would only make that harder.
>
> But if the whitespace is semantic, there's no saying it can't
> be used to
On Sun, Apr 02, 2023 at 07:24:25PM -0700, David Christensen wrote:
> On 4/2/23 14:57, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote:
> > I'm afraid that Python has one specific feature that puts me off.
> > Sensitivity to indentation. To those who first had to learn 'make',
> > it's a sin that cannot be
On Sun, Apr 02, 2023 at 09:16:08PM +0200, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Greg Wooledge wrote:
>
> But development is faster with Python [...]
> >>>
> >>> Is it?
> >>
> >> Yes.
> >
> > Development is fastest using whatever language you know
> > best. This is not an objective argument.
>
> Put it
On 03/04/2023 04:59, Tom Browder wrote:
On Sun, Apr 2, 2023 at 3:42 PM Michel Verdier wrote:
Le 2 avril 2023 Nicholas Geovanis a écrit :
> Python is a more modern programming language than perl, and more in the
> European CS tradition. Larry Wall said directly that the OO features in
> perl
Hello,
On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 05:41:14AM +0200, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Andy Smith wrote:
>
> > For example, even if some AI assistant is written in Python,
> > and even if you can ask it to spit out a device driver for
> > the Linux kernel that does X and Y with Z hardware, do you
> > think the
David Christensen wrote:
> Code that writes code is a very useful technique, and I use
> it. Whitespace as syntax would only make that harder.
But if the whitespace is semantic, there's no saying it can't
be used to produce even more - indeed, of its own kind, even.
In Computer Security it is
On 4/2/23 14:38, Emanuel Berg wrote:
David Christensen wrote:
For sysadmin, I *use* what comes on the platform. On Debian:
2023-04-02 13:40:08 root@taz ~
# cat /etc/debian_version ; uname -a
11.6
Linux taz 5.10.0-21-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 5.10.162-1
(2023-01-21) x86_64 GNU/Linux
2023-04-02
Andy Smith wrote:
> For example, even if some AI assistant is written in Python,
> and even if you can ask it to spit out a device driver for
> the Linux kernel that does X and Y with Z hardware, do you
> think the device driver that it spits out will itself be
> written in Python?
It is up to
Hello,
On Sun, Apr 02, 2023 at 04:59:15PM +0800, cor...@free.fr wrote:
> I saw many commands in /bin and /usr/bin are written by perl.
> is perl still the first choice for sysadmin on linux?
I don't accept the premise that it ever was the first choice, and I
say that as someone who likes Perl
Hello,
On Sun, Apr 02, 2023 at 11:36:16PM +0200, Oliver Schoede wrote:
> I don't see much of a reason for learning Perl today unless you're
> a die-hard hobbyist with near infinite amount of time and an
> undying penchant for obsolete technology.
Perl continues to get new releases and new
On 4/2/23 14:57, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote:
I'm afraid that Python has one specific feature that puts me off.
Sensitivity to indentation. To those who first had to learn 'make',
it's a sin that cannot be forgiven.
+1
Code that writes code is a very useful technique, and I use it.
On 4/2/23 14:36, Oliver Schoede wrote:
Seems to me
people easily forget this but Perl was intended, created to be a tool.
A text processing tool. Not a language, or environment like Python.
https://www.linuxjournal.com/article/3394
Marjorie: Back in the beginning, what inspired you to write
Our production system is using heavily perl (many thousand lines of perl5 code)
- it's mod_perl, but still perl.
Thanks.
David Christensen wrote:
> Look at the use of parentheses in Lisp [...]
I have thought about that - is Lisp possible without them?
But how do you then know priority? I'm sure someone tried to
get rid of them, but how?
> the use of white space as syntax in Python
AKA "significant whitespace" in
On 4/2/23 12:11, Greg Wooledge wrote:
Development is fastest using whatever language you know best.
I would add -- "that is suitable to the task".
David
p.s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainfuck
On 4/2/23 10:14, Emanuel Berg wrote:
tomas wrote:
But Python's lambdas are preposterous (not so Perl's ;-)
Well, can't compare either to Lisp, the Pythagorean theorem of
computing ...
https://hop.perl.plover.com/
Preface
Around 1993 I started reading books about Lisp, and I
On 4/2/23 10:09, Emanuel Berg wrote:
Nicholas Geovanis wrote:
Larry Wall said directly
that the OO features in perl were fake :-)
Maybe there are OO modules by now?
https://perldoc.perl.org/perlootut#PERL-OO-SYSTEMS
David
On 4/2/23 09:31, Nicholas Geovanis wrote:
Python is a more modern programming language than perl, and more in the
European CS tradition. Larry Wall said ...
https://www.linuxjournal.com/article/3394
Marjorie: In what way is Perl better than other scripting languages such
as Python and
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo
