Robert Watson rwat...@freebsd.org wrote:
... web browsers [are] basically operating systems at this point ...
Isn't this a bit of an exaggeration? Not too many browsers have
to deal with process/thread scheduling, or device drivers, or
booting, or file system issues -- they rely on the OS for
On Fri, 26 Mar 2010, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
Robert Watson rwat...@freebsd.org wrote:
... web browsers [are] basically operating systems at this point ...
Isn't this a bit of an exaggeration? Not too many browsers have to deal
with process/thread scheduling, or device drivers, or
Ivan Voras ivo...@freebsd.org writes:
Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no writes:
Bourne shell is a perfectly fine programming language if you know
how to use it.
I'll agree that it's fine but only in the abstract - e.g. that it is
Turing complete :)
Emphasis on if you know how to use it.
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010, Ivan Voras wrote:
Wouldn't it be nice to have a blessed (i.e. present-in-base) script
language interpreter with a syntax that has evolved since the 1970-ies?
(with a side-glance to C that *has* evolved since the KR style).
...
As a possible alternative, or at least to
On 03/25/10 09:51, Robert Watson wrote:
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010, Ivan Voras wrote:
Wouldn't it be nice to have a blessed (i.e. present-in-base) script
language interpreter with a syntax that has evolved since the
1970-ies? (with a side-glance to C that *has* evolved since the KR
style).
...
As
On 03/23/10 16:08, John Baldwin wrote:
[snip - looks like a good utility, will probably use it instead of
mergemaster if it gets committed, like the idea about automated updates]
To that end, I wrote a new tool that I think does a decent job of solving
these goals.
Since the issue comes
On Wednesday 24 March 2010 9:11:21 am Ivan Voras wrote:
On 03/23/10 16:08, John Baldwin wrote:
[snip - looks like a good utility, will probably use it instead of
mergemaster if it gets committed, like the idea about automated updates]
To that end, I wrote a new tool that I think does a
On 03/24/10 15:02, John Baldwin wrote:
On Wednesday 24 March 2010 9:11:21 am Ivan Voras wrote:
On 03/23/10 16:08, John Baldwin wrote:
[snip - looks like a good utility, will probably use it instead of
mergemaster if it gets committed, like the idea about automated updates]
To that end, I
On 2010-Mar-24 14:11:21 +0100, Ivan Voras ivo...@freebsd.org wrote:
Since the issue comes around very rarely, I assume there are not many
people who also get the shivers when they see a shell script (and then a
posixy /bin/sh shell script) more than a 100 lines long? :)
With the specific
On Wednesday 24 March 2010 10:49:12 am Ivan Voras wrote:
On 03/24/10 15:02, John Baldwin wrote:
On Wednesday 24 March 2010 9:11:21 am Ivan Voras wrote:
On 03/23/10 16:08, John Baldwin wrote:
[snip - looks like a good utility, will probably use it instead of
mergemaster if it gets
Ivan Voras ivo...@freebsd.org writes:
C is good enough. I'm after /bin/sh here.
Bourne shell is a perfectly fine programming language if you know how to
use it.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - d...@des.no
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 6:11 AM, Ivan Voras ivo...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 03/23/10 16:08, John Baldwin wrote:
[snip - looks like a good utility, will probably use it instead of
mergemaster if it gets committed, like the idea about automated updates]
To that end, I wrote a new tool that I
On 24 March 2010 20:03, Peter Jeremy peterjer...@acm.org wrote:
On 2010-Mar-24 14:11:21 +0100, Ivan Voras ivo...@freebsd.org wrote:
There's awk (though it's somewhat restricted in its abilities to do
anything more than text manipulation) but in principle, I agree. The
requirements as I see
2010/3/24 Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no:
Ivan Voras ivo...@freebsd.org writes:
C is good enough. I'm after /bin/sh here.
Bourne shell is a perfectly fine programming language if you know how to
use it.
I'll agree that it's fine but only in the abstract - e.g. that it is
Turing complete :)
14 matches
Mail list logo
