On Fri, Jul 30, 1999 at 03:24:56PM +0300, guy keren wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, Gaal Yahas wrote:
>
> > Aaaarrrggghh!! Will people save themselves the trouble of learning
> > csh "programming", then spending hours of funless debugging and
> > bug incompatibilities across machines?
>
> ah... su
On 28 Jul 1999, chen shapira wrote:
> I'd suggest learning python 'nstead of perl.
>
> its just as powerfull and much much easier to learn and much more readable.
i'd re-phrase your claim as well:
I'd suggest learning python _AS WELL AS_ perl, because ... (quoet your own
reasoning here).
rem
On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, Gaal Yahas wrote:
> Aaaarrrggghh!! Will people save themselves the trouble of learning
> csh "programming", then spending hours of funless debugging and
> bug incompatibilities across machines?
ah... such a short-sighted point of view... it's not like you, gaal.
sometimes, y
On Wed, Jul 28, 1999 at 07:51:15PM +0300, Herouth Maoz wrote:
> >Besides...Obfuscated Python? Nah ;)
>
> Guys, is this going to become a religious interpreter war? Because if it is,
> tell me, and I'll get off the list for a while...
If anyone is interested in a professional, religeon-free compa
On Wed, 28 Jul 1999, Herouth Maoz wrote:
> Guys, is this going to become a religious interpreter war? Because if it is,
> tell me, and I'll get off the list for a while...
I don't see how a bunch of people sharing their experience with different
interpreters is a `interpreter war'. Someone was
On Wed, 28 Jul 1999 19:25:18 +0300 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Omer) wrote:
>After using Perl for 2 years or so,
>both on Unix systems and on Win32 (the ActiveState
>port is quite good, actually) and trying out
>Python, I'd still go with Perl. Nothing, and I mean
>NOTHING, can match CPAN for sheer variety
After using Perl for 2 years or so,
both on Unix systems and on Win32 (the ActiveState
port is quite good, actually) and trying out
Python, I'd still go with Perl. Nothing, and I mean
NOTHING, can match CPAN for sheer variety and usefulnes.
Even MS embraced (ack) Perl, and have commited to extend
On 28 Jul 1999, chen shapira wrote:
Yes yes, but how efficient is it ? My experience with python tells me it
is a horrid resource eater. Moreover, does it have all the extensions Perl
has (includes from CPAN) ?
--Ariel
> I'd suggest learning python 'nstead of perl.
>
> its just as powerfull
I'd suggest learning python 'nstead of perl.
its just as powerfull and much much easier to learn and much more readable.
Chen.
"Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> GY>> If you want to write something very simple, go ahead and use Bourne
> GY>> shell for it (/bin/sh). Fo
GY>> If you want to write something very simple, go ahead and use Bourne
GY>> shell for it (/bin/sh). For anything more complex than 20 lines it
GY>> does pay to learn Perl[2]..
It does pay to learn Perl in any case - because Perl is Good Thing (TM).
Even Microsoft knows this :)
--
[EMAIL PROTEC
On Tue, Jul 27, 1999 at 11:04:43AM +0300, Moti Levy wrote:
> this is for C shell but a nice one
> Moti
> http://star-www.rl.ac.uk/star/docs/sc4.htx/sc4.html
So I'm predictable[1]:
Aaaarrrggghh!! Will people save themselves the trouble of learning
csh "programming", then spending hours of funles
11 matches
Mail list logo
