On Tuesday, August 20, 2002, at 12:39 AM, Erik Price wrote:
#!/usr/bin/python
#
# basenamesort.py
#
# Unix-style filter that sorts a newline-separated
# list of files by the file basename
#
# Example usage: cat files.txt | basenamesort.py
import sys
import os
tempDict = {}
for
Hi All,
Can the 2GB file size limit be changed? I need to store about 10GB worth
of data in a single file, but it dies at 2GB.
TIA,
Kenny
--
Tact is just *not* saying true stuff -- Cordelia Chase
Kenneth E. Lussier
Can any of the Python programmers on this list implement this as a
one-liner? Just wondering.
(with Python's indentation rules, I think that this would be difficult)
Thanks,
--kevin
PS I could write a very similar program in Perl, obviously.
--
Kevin D. Clark / Cetacean Networks /
In a message dated: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 17:17:43 EDT
Bill Freeman said:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Suggestions for improvement welcome.
Use perl.
--
Use Python
Bill,
[ Note: this is not intended as the beginning of a flame-fest! ]
I'm curious what Python has to offer in this area.
This is a test to [EMAIL PROTECTED] My previous messages
are timing out from the Postfix program zcamail03.zca.compaq.com, and
I don't know why.
--
Bob Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Suppose I want to take over the world.
First, thanks to Kevin and Erik (and all)
for their examples and participation.
Second, when I said that one example doesn't
suck I was just trying to be high-larious,
not implying that the other one DID suck.
Apologies for any implied slight, and my
allergies are my own problem.
Third, just
On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 09:10:58AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 20 Aug 2002, at 8:12am, Kenneth E. Lussier wrote:
Sorry for the lack of description. I didn't want to get into too much
detail, since it is a bit embarrassing I'm doing a Windows backup to a
samba mount. I get write
In a message dated: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 19:18:32 EDT
Derek D. Martin said:
1. Perl seems to favor supporting a variety of features with obscure,
meaningless, two-character variables that might be clearer with flags
or arguments to functions that make use of it.
Define obscure please. Everything
Whats a mini install fest?
Jim
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 19, 2002 3:21 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [gnhlug-announce] MELBA Meeting Wednesday night
When: Wednesday, 21 August 2002, 19:30ish
Where: Martha's
I think the more interesting question is How dense is the resulting object
code which implements the semantics of the program?. This has been an
on-going language design/implementation question for most of the history of
computing. For example, a particular program can be implemented in C which
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At some point hitherto, Mark Komarinski hath spake thusly:
Samba and NFS(v2) don't like 2GB file sizes.
http://www.suse.de/~aj/linux_lfs.html
That page is a bit outdated. It talks about RH 6.2 as being current,
and doesn't mention ext3 at all. I
In a message dated: 19 Aug 2002 18:22:20 EDT
Ryan T. McCarthy said:
If you want the whole internet experience, I take it you don't filter
spam. You are paying for access to it, after all.
There is a huge difference between *me* choosing to filter spam and
someone else *telling* me it won't
In a message dated: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 07:17:55 EDT
Jim Cadorette said:
Whats a mini install fest?
It's like a big install-fest, only smaller :)
--
Seeya,
Paul
--
It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing,
but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away.
In a message dated: 20 Aug 2002 07:34:27 EDT
Kenneth E. Lussier said:
Hi All,
Can the 2GB file size limit be changed? I need to store about 10GB worth
of data in a single file, but it dies at 2GB.
I don't know if ext2 supports big files. I think you need to turn
something on in the kernel
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At some point hitherto, [EMAIL PROTECTED] hath spake thusly:
1. Perl seems to favor supporting a variety of features with obscure,
meaningless, two-character variables that might be clearer with flags
or arguments to functions that make use of it.
I respond to Michael O'Donnell, Kevin Clark, Ben Scott, and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] in this response:
Michael O'Donnell wrote:
Wow. That doesn't suck. Thanks!
Well, I wrote it in a text editor called BBEdit on Mac OS X. BBEdit's
advert blurb is, literally: It doesn't suck
In a message dated: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 11:57:55 EDT
Erik Price said:
But at the point where I say to myself, I really think that I could
write this better and more easily if I used an object-oriented
methodology and designed some class definitions to help me, I would
turn to Python and not
In a message dated: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 10:45:48 EDT
Derek D. Martin said:
Here are two ways to do (more or less) the same thing, one in C and
one in Perl:
setlinebuf( file );
$| = 1;
Which is clearer to the inexperienced reader (but experienced
programmer)? Which is easier to remember,
In a message dated: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 10:55:00 EDT
Hewitt Tech said:
P.S. For many programmers, it's the language they use every day that they
favor. What is obscure for the neophyte is business as usual for the
experienced programmer in that language.
Exactly the point I was trying to make!
On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, at 7:18pm, Derek D. Martin wrote:
Perl seems to have gone out of its way to work like other common Unix
tools/languages (shell scripting, C, sed/grep), in others it seems to go
out of its way to do things in such a way as to be as confusing as
possible.
How is that
On Tuesday, August 20, 2002, at 12:00 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But at the point where I say to myself, I really think that I could
write this better and more easily if I used an object-oriented
methodology and designed some class definitions to help me, I would
turn to Python and not
On Tuesday, August 20, 2002, at 08:07 AM, Kevin D. Clark wrote:
In fact, my one-liner is probably the cannonical way that an
experienced Perl programmer would have solved that problem (or, at
least, pretty close).
For that matter, I find that the word cannonical is bandied about in
Perl
Erik Price [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
For that matter, I find that the word cannonical is bandied about in
Perl culture far more than anywhere else! ;) Interesting for a
language in which there's more than one way to do things.
Well, I just used the word canonical in the canonical way...
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, at 10:45am, Derek D. Martin wrote:
Programming Perl seems to almost, but not quite recognize how painful
these things are to learn, by offering mnemonic devicess for each of
them.
use English;
That is not just an idle comment; it refers to the fact that Perl does
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At some point hitherto, [EMAIL PROTECTED] hath spake thusly:
Hmmm, if you don't like $|, as Kevin already pointed out, you can:
Use English;
$OUTPUT_AUTOFLUSH = 1;
which I actually find far more readable and understandable than
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At some point hitherto, Erik Price hath spake thusly:
there is no meaning inherent in $!
Right. Just like there is no meaning inherent in #! but we all know
what it means when it comes at the top of a script.
Yes, but again, it is not that
In a message dated: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 12:34:47 EDT
Derek D. Martin said:
But the point is that there is no meaning inherent in $!
(the use of which BTW, I have no idea, despite having seen and I'm
pretty sure even used)...
Actually, there is. The meaning of $! is what just blew up. I.e.,
In a message dated: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 15:01:45 EDT
Derek D. Martin said:
I don't believe there was ever a name-length limitation on filenames.
Then you believe incorrectly. Many variants of Unix had a
14-character filename limit. There is still a limit today, though
it's ridiculously large,
In a message dated: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 15:01:45 EDT
Derek D. Martin said:
At some point hitherto, [EMAIL PROTECTED] hath spake thusly:
In a message dated: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 12:37:34 EDT
Derek D. Martin said:
I never claimed Unix commands weren't obscure; they ARE. I prefer
them to
http://www.habeas.com/faq/index.htm
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, at 3:09pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then you believe incorrectly. Many variants of Unix had a
14-character filename limit. There is still a limit today, though
it's ridiculously large, so as not to matter practically.
Ahh, 14 characters, that does sound familiar.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Agreed, and in most cases where you need to deal with arrays of
hashes of hashes, or hashes of arrays of hashes, etc. you're probably
better off using something like C.
Of course, if you've mucked about with this type of thing long
enough, it becomes rather
In a message dated: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 16:20:29 EDT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I think he is thinking of the five-character limit in the original
linker(s) used to develop Unix (which very well may have come from Multics).
That five-character limit gave us the infamous creat(2) system call.
On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 03:32:17PM -0400, Jeff Macdonald
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.habeas.com/faq/index.htm
(We'll see if this post gets through; I'm 1 for 3 so far)
Apparently a lot of people saw the Slashdot story and started coding
their own Bayesian spam filters. There have
In a message dated: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 15:16:58 CDT
Thomas Charron said:
I do occasionally use Perl, but I find that it's usually when I want
to do a lot of regexp work, or shell-script-like work, but don't want
to take the performance hit of using a shell script. Otherwise, bash
or C suit
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, at 4:14pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think he is thinking of the five-character limit in the original
linker(s) used to develop Unix (which very well may have come from
Multics). That five-character limit gave us the infamous creat(2) system
call.
H, I don't
The 14 character limit did exist in Unix versions 6 and 7. Version 6 was
used as a basis for the BSD releases. Version 7 was the basis for what
became System 3 followed by System V. Long file names I think came out for
the first time in BSD 4.3 (or possibly 4.2).
Unlike MS DOS, which had a
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
=
=In a message dated: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 15:16:58 CDT
=Thomas Charron said:
=
=For example, in shell, the construct:
=
= cd /tmp rm foo
Whotchoo talkin 'bout Willis?
cd == chdir is a builtin command. But point taken.
=
=creates 2 sub-shell
I think you are correct. Create(2) is a system call. Linkage editors those
days were rather primitive. I think the name limit was either 7 or 8, but
external names in C were many times autoprefixed with __, such that creat
became __creat.
The C language had a limit of 8 characters for a
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, Jerry Feldman wrote:
=I think you are correct. Create(2) is a system call. Linkage editors those
=days were rather primitive. I think the name limit was either 7 or 8, but
=external names in C were many times autoprefixed with __, such that creat
=became __creat.
=The C
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, at 2:00pm, Erik Price wrote:
code
#!/usr/bin/python
Heh. This is pretty ironic. One of the standard Luddite responses to
Python is that whitespace is syntactically significant. Personally, I find
it a bit weird, but I'm not used to it, and it certainly isn't a
You had C? All we had was assembler! You had assembler? All we had was
ones and zeros! You had ones and zeros? ...
-Alex
- Original Message -
From: Jerry Feldman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 4:53 PM
Subject: Re: UNIX Arcana [was Re: Perl (or
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, at 12:37pm, Derek D. Martin wrote:
[ Several paragraphs of completely irrelevant and bogus argument deleted.
I will provide explicit debunking of said argument if so requested. ]
There are very few Unix commands whose names are completely
unintelligible, and learning
On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 03:46:40PM -0400, Michael O'Donnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Given a list of pathnames, I'd like to be able to
sort that list by the basename of each file in the
list, ie. the pathname
q/r/s/t/u/v/aaa
...would sort ahead of
//bbb
...because
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, at 12:30pm, Erik Price wrote:
For that matter, I find that the word cannonical is bandied about in
Perl culture far more than anywhere else! ;) Interesting for a language
in which there's more than one way to do things.
I suspect that is why. If there are many ways
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, at 9:54am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is Python also a text-munging type language aimed at sysadmin type
problems? Was it too, specifically designed to pick up where awk and sed
fell short?
I know nothing about the Python language, but I do know a tiny bit about
the
Didn't you work with Grace Hopper :-)
Hewitt Tech wrote:
You had C? All we had was assembler! You had assembler? All we had was
ones and zeros! You had ones and zeros? ...
--
--
Gerald Feldman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Boston Computer Solutions and Consulting
ICQ#156300 PGP Key ID:C5061EA9
PGP Key
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At some point hitherto, [EMAIL PROTECTED] hath spake thusly:
Yet you complain about Perl being hard to learn and use, for the same
reasons, and not just for you, but for everyone?
I absolutely said no such thing.
Let's make this even simpler.
On Tuesday, August 20, 2002, at 08:28 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All three mean the same thing, but the first is by far the most
common in
American English. Perl is a lot like English.
I couldn't agree more. Here's why:
English is supposedly the hardest language in the world to
49 matches
Mail list logo
