From wiki:
There was originally some controversy over whether the Unix time_t should be
signed or unsigned. If unsigned, its range in the future would be doubled,
postponing the 32-bit overflow (by 68 years). However, it would then be
incapable of representing times prior to 1970. Dennis
Daniel Keep wrote:
Christopher Wright wrote:
With Powershell, you need to be familiar with the tools for dealing with
System.Data.DataTable or whatever. Maybe it would only take ten minutes.
The most time it could save in that regard is an hour.
The syntax for these commands is so simple, you
On Thu, 09 Apr 2009 10:10:35 -0400, Jarrett Billingsley
jarrett.billings...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 3:17 AM, Alexander Pánek
alexander.pa...@brainsware.org wrote:
The thing is, I don't *want* my _shell_ to be able to parse anything.
It's a
shell, not a framework with
Sean Kelly wrote:
== Quote from Sergey Gromov (snake.sc...@gmail.com)'s article
Windows is my main development platform, and it drives me nuts. I'd
move to Linux but I'm afraid of little important things getting in the
way, like a requirement to use Outlook for my corporate mail, and Flash
CS4
On 08/04/2009 02:48, Christopher Wright wrote:
Yigal Chripun wrote:
ever heard of powershell? it is in fact a superior design for a shell
compared to most unix shells.
I have tried it briefly. Too briefly to give a good analysis of it.
The GUI is better than that of cmd.exe, but not anywhere
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 21:55:34 -0400, Jarrett Billingsley
jarrett.billings...@gmail.com wrote:
How about something like:
%{
// lots of bash-style commands!
}
That works :)
-Steve
On Wed, 08 Apr 2009 06:38:53 -0400, Yigal Chripun yigal...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 08/04/2009 02:48, Christopher Wright wrote:
Yigal Chripun wrote:
ever heard of powershell? it is in fact a superior design for a shell
compared to most unix shells.
I have tried it briefly. Too briefly to give
Daniel Keep wrote:
Powershell is designed to work with managed (.NET) objects. It can
dynamically introspect these objects and pull them apart, mutate them,
convert them, etc. Imagine if every file on a UNIX system also carried
around a reference to its own parser, and a description of how to
On Wed, 08 Apr 2009 10:10:29 -0400, Daniel Keep
daniel.keep.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
[snip]
-Steve
This is getting rather inflammatory, so let me clarify a few things.
What Yigal should have said was that when everything is a file, there is
no API for the
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 11:09 AM, Christopher Wright dhase...@gmail.com wrote:
In this regard, Unix has a standard interface: text. This turns out to be
usable 90% of the time. It has the advantage that you can write a program
in any language that can process text. But it has disadvantages,
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Wed, 08 Apr 2009 06:38:53 -0400, Yigal Chripun yigal...@gmail.com
wrote:
Windows has a different design than Unix's everything is a file
which IMO is a stupid legacy design from the 70's.
The old technology from the 70's chestnut.
I hear the everything is a
== Quote from Andrei Alexandrescu (seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org)'s article
At a company we were using MS Transaction Server. I went around and
asked my bosses why. Nobody knew. I asked what features of it we need.
Nobody knew, and they didn't knew even what the MTS was supposed to do.
The
Sean Kelly wrote:
== Quote from Andrei Alexandrescu (seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org)'s article
At a company we were using MS Transaction Server. I went around and
asked my bosses why. Nobody knew. I asked what features of it we need.
Nobody knew, and they didn't knew even what the MTS was
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 11:09 AM, Christopher Wright dhase...@gmail.com wrote:
In this regard, Unix has a standard interface: text. This turns out to be
usable 90% of the time. It has the advantage that you can write a program
in any language that can process text.
On 08/04/2009 18:10, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
This does sound useful. More so than was explained, sorry to Yigal for
being so inflammatory, but what can you expect when you say Unix is a
stupid design ;) It's just a different design, one that works very
well for script writers.
sorry for
On Thu, 09 Apr 2009 10:52:02 +1000, Daniel Keep wrote:
Christopher Wright wrote:
With Powershell, you need to be familiar with the tools for dealing
with System.Data.DataTable or whatever. Maybe it would only take ten
minutes. The most time it could save in that regard is an hour.
The
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
So the notion that there is a kernel catering
to your needs may warrant a closer look.
fix
Jesse Phillips wrote:
Many people suggest Live-CDs for introduction, but this is only
go to show that you have a browser in Linux. It doesn't give a true Linux
experience.
I agree. Somehow I'm surprised that the discussion drifted into a pure
user-level feature comparison though.
Below
Ralf Schneider wrote:
If I were to quickly give the most significant bit of my opinion, that
would be this: Unix is for programmers and Windows is for end users.
As such, even though both ultimately accomplish the task of putting a
computer's resources at your disposal, their foci are
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 15:03:54 -0400, grauzone n...@example.net wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 14:35:04 -0400, grauzone n...@example.net wrote:
But shell scripting in itself is so powerful for this kind of stuff.
I've written lots of little scripts to do fantastic
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Ralf Schneider wrote:
If I were to quickly give the most significant bit of my opinion,
that would be this: Unix is for programmers and Windows is for end
users. As such, even though both ultimately accomplish the task of
putting a computer's resources at your
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
For example, here's a script I wrote to change which D compiler I want
to use:
What would be fun is seeing how that script would look written in D,
then run using rdmd!
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 15:03:54 -0400, grauzone n...@example.net wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 14:35:04 -0400, grauzone n...@example.net wrote:
But shell scripting in itself is so powerful for this kind of
stuff. I've written lots of little
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 14:35:04 -0400, grauzone n...@example.net wrote:
But shell scripting in itself is so powerful for this kind of stuff.
I've written lots of little scripts to do fantastic things that on
Windows would be so painful (without cygwin of course).
Walter Bright wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
It took me a couple of minutes to write under her eyes a script that
downloaded HTML, scraped the code for links, followed those of
interest, and output a concatenation of all pages she was interested
in, with details highlighted, that was
On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 11:11:44AM -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
It took me a couple of minutes to write under her eyes a script that
downloaded HTML, scraped the code for links, followed those of interest,
and output a concatenation of all pages she was interested
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
I'll risk an example. A while ago my wife was looking for a place for her
medical residency. There was an online service that would give her a long
webpage with links to all institutions she was interested
About your general point, I think that's only because all the shell
commands are available by default. To delete a file, there's simply
rm. A general purpose language would normally require more code to
delete a file, and that additional code is perceived as noise. The
thing to do would be to
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 14:11:44 -0400, Walter Bright
newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
It took me a couple of minutes to write under her eyes a script that
downloaded HTML, scraped the code for links, followed those of
interest, and output a concatenation of all
Walter Bright:
Andrei Alexandrescu:
It took me a couple of minutes to write under her eyes a script that
downloaded HTML, scraped the code for links, followed those of interest,
and output a concatenation of all pages she was interested in, with
details highlighted, that was loadable
But shell scripting in itself is so powerful for this kind of stuff.
I've written lots of little scripts to do fantastic things that on
Windows would be so painful (without cygwin of course). Like renaming
all files of a certain type to something else, or copying select files
to another
grauzone wrote:
Sure, /bin/sh is the least common denominator. But is there a UNIX that
can't run python?
Well one good part about these tools is that there's plenty of overlap
between them. Like stick-shift cars, you can drive at a given speed in
two gears without ruining the engine.
I
== Quote from Sergey Gromov (snake.sc...@gmail.com)'s article
Windows is my main development platform, and it drives me nuts. I'd
move to Linux but I'm afraid of little important things getting in the
way, like a requirement to use Outlook for my corporate mail, and Flash
CS4 for
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 18:48:19 -0400, Sergey Gromov snake.sc...@gmail.com
wrote:
Using Cygwin tools is a pain because Cygwin emulates a Unix-like file
system view while other tools produce and expect native Windows paths.
just as an aside, have you looked at cygwin's cygpath tool? Not a
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 18:17:12 -0400, Jarrett Billingsley
jarrett.billings...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Steven Schveighoffer
schvei...@yahoo.com wrote:
And regarding using it as an user shell: there's an interactive command
line interpreter.
if you type ls, does it
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 7:14 PM, Steven Schveighoffer
schvei...@yahoo.com wrote:
(It also follows that if you wrote a full shellscript, in a .mdsh file
or something, the compiler would, when compiling it, start in MiniD
mode by default so you wouldn't have to escape every statement with a
%.)
Yigal Chripun wrote:
ever heard of powershell? it is in fact a superior design for a shell
compared to most unix shells.
I have tried it briefly. Too briefly to give a good analysis of it.
The GUI is better than that of cmd.exe, but not anywhere near as good
as, say, GNOME Terminal. (It's
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 19:52:12 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer
schvei...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 19:41:36 -0400, Jarrett Billingsley
jarrett.billings...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 7:14 PM, Steven Schveighoffer
schvei...@yahoo.com wrote:
(It also follows that if you
Tue, 07 Apr 2009 19:06:04 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 18:48:19 -0400, Sergey Gromov snake.sc...@gmail.com
wrote:
Using Cygwin tools is a pain because Cygwin emulates a Unix-like file
system view while other tools produce and expect native Windows paths.
just
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 20:02:33 -0400, Jarrett Billingsley
jarrett.billings...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 7:53 PM, Steven Schveighoffer
schvei...@yahoo.com wrote:
OK, that was *really* confusing, let me re-explain:
if you are in interactive mode, the default is shell mode, and %
Tue, 07 Apr 2009 21:03:54 +0200, grauzone wrote:
I can log into ANY Linux, Solaris, BSD, OSX, etc system and have a
reasonable /bin/sh that allows at least bourne shell functionality. The
same can't be said for almost any other scripting language you can throw
at me.
Sure, /bin/sh is
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 8:21 PM, Steven Schveighoffer
schvei...@yahoo.com wrote:
Might I suggest that this not be the case. I'd rather see a statement like
the following in the script (if you wish to do miniD by default):
#!/bin/mdsh
%shell.setMode(scripted)
// and to set it back
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 22:12:07 +0200, Ralf Schneider wrote:
Well at least you've got to make up your mind. It's amazing how you
mention instability in three instances and stagnation in two instances,
without ever noticing the irony. What's happening?
Instability: Red hat crashes most often.
Saaa wrote:
Yah, I too remember my Windows-only days the way I'd remember a temporary
disability. (I recall to this day: any little thing I wanted to do, I'd
start off a wizard in Dev Studio. It was kind of a surprise for me to find
out that all those programs had been written, along with
Also - for me at least, learning Unix as an occasional activity (e.g.
cygwin, the occasional ssh, trying a couple of things) has had very little
value. Didn't work for me in the least. I remember how I installed cygwin
for the first time and started it. It was very exciting - I could try
Saaa wrote:
Also - for me at least, learning Unix as an occasional activity (e.g.
cygwin, the occasional ssh, trying a couple of things) has had very little
value. Didn't work for me in the least. I remember how I installed cygwin
for the first time and started it. It was very exciting - I
When you'd be writing computer programs.
But that would go like this: install eclipse, check how to compile under
Linux and start programming.
Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote in message
news:grduhp$1rk...@digitalmars.com...
Saaa wrote:
When you'd be writing computer programs.
But that would go like this: install eclipse, check how to compile under
Linux and start programming.
Nope :o). When you'll figure
Saaa Wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote in message
news:grduhp$1rk...@digitalmars.com...
Saaa wrote:
When you'd be writing computer programs.
But that would go like this: install eclipse, check how to compile under
Linux and start programming.
Nope
Saaa wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote in message
news:grduhp$1rk...@digitalmars.com...
Saaa wrote:
When you'd be writing computer programs.
But that would go like this: install eclipse, check how to compile under
Linux and start programming.
Nope :o). When you'll
Thanks,
I really do feel impaired. Not so much as in that I don't use unix, but more
in that I see software lagging behind hardware.
I think maybe this lag is a bit less when using unix but only if I would
start using the right tools (yes I'm a mouse fanatic and found it
surprisingly stupid
== Quote from Jason House (jason.james.ho...@gmail.com)'s article
The problem with GUI interfaces is that common things are easy and uncommon
things are impossible. One unix tool you will use over and over again is grep.
As
a commandline utility, it can be combined with other stuff such as ls,
Jason House Wrote:
For example, as an emacs user, I can easilly program for an hour
without touching my mouse.
I would say 'not using the mouse' is clear sign the programmer is
coding using a programmer's editor and not a modern day IDE.
I would also say many Windows programmers are
Saaa wrote:
Thanks,
I really do feel impaired. Not so much as in that I don't use unix, but more
in that I see software lagging behind hardware.
I think maybe this lag is a bit less when using unix but only if I would
start using the right tools (yes I'm a mouse fanatic and found it
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 04:19:40 +0400, Jussi Jumppanen jus...@zeusedit.com wrote:
Jason House Wrote:
For example, as an emacs user, I can easilly program for an hour
without touching my mouse.
I would say 'not using the mouse' is clear sign the programmer is
coding using a programmer's editor
Jussi Jumppanen wrote:
Jason House Wrote:
For example, as an emacs user, I can easilly program for an hour
without touching my mouse.
I would say 'not using the mouse' is clear sign the programmer is
coding using a programmer's editor and not a modern day IDE.
I would also say many
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 04:41:39 +0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Jussi Jumppanen wrote:
Jason House Wrote:
For example, as an emacs user, I can easilly program for an hour
without touching my mouse.
I would say 'not using the mouse' is clear sign the
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Denis Koroskin 2kor...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 04:41:39 +0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Jussi Jumppanen wrote:
Jason House Wrote:
For example, as an emacs user, I can easilly program for an hour without
touching
Denis Koroskin wrote:
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 04:41:39 +0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Jussi Jumppanen wrote:
Jason House Wrote:
For example, as an emacs user, I can easilly program for an hour
without touching my mouse.
I would say 'not using the mouse' is
Bill Baxter wrote:
Link? Google gave me this: http://www.helpware.net/FAR/ which
doesn't seem to be what you are talking about.
http://www.farmanager.com/
Andrei
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 04:55:43 +0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Denis Koroskin wrote:
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 04:41:39 +0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
Jussi Jumppanen wrote:
Jason House Wrote:
For example, as an emacs user, I can
Saaa wrote:
Thanks,
I really do feel impaired. Not so much as in that I don't use unix, but
more in that I see software lagging behind hardware.
I think maybe this lag is a bit less when using unix but only if I would
start using the right tools (yes I'm a mouse fanatic and found it
Jussi Jumppanen wrote:
Jason House Wrote:
For example, as an emacs user, I can easilly program for an hour
without touching my mouse.
I would say 'not using the mouse' is clear sign the programmer is
coding using a programmer's editor and not a modern day IDE.
That's true, but that
http://artlung.com/smorgasborg/C_R_Y_P_T_O_N_O_M_I_C_O_N.shtml
oldie but goldie.
my take. cygwin on windoze == fuckin' with two condoms.
Jussi Jumppanen wrote:
Replace ls with dir, download the Win32 version of grep, sed, awk
and you can run all those tools just fine from the Windows command
line, or from within any decent editor.
You don't have to go to Unix to find the command line.
The Windows terminal emulator sucks.
On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 10:29:57PM -0400, Christopher Wright wrote:
The Windows terminal emulator sucks. This is not subject to debate.
What terminal emulator?
This might be a bit of a nitpick, but Windows doesn't try to emulate a
terminal (not in the OS anyway; there are hundreds of third
Christopher Wright wrote:
If you need to use the command line, you really should use Unix, if it's
reasonable. The Windows filesystem structure is a source of pain, and
it's hard to work around. It's hard to get information about interacting
with the OS from the command line. Windows and
Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 10:29:57PM -0400, Christopher Wright wrote:
The Windows terminal emulator sucks. This is not subject to debate.
What terminal emulator?
This might be a bit of a nitpick, but Windows doesn't try to emulate a
terminal (not in the OS anyway; there
68 matches
Mail list logo
