On 9/13/10 12:21 PM, "no-re...@cfengine.com" <no-re...@cfengine.com> wrote:
> Forum: Cfengine Help
> Subject: Re: Questions about the reference manual
> Author: neilhwatson
> Link to topic: https://cfengine.com/forum/read.php?3,18107,18211#msg-18211
>
> In my opinion all sysadmins should have some basic programming theory. If you
> are writing shell scripts and perl code without the theory then I fear for
> your code and the hosts it runs on.
>
> depth_search => urecurse("inf");
>
> means, for depth search use body part (think subroutine call) urecurse and
> pass the string 'inf' to it.
>
> body depth_search urecurse(d) {
>
> means, depth search body part who's name is urecurse and assign the passed
> value to the scalar 'd'. Think of perl's shift.
Opinions/theories are like...and we all have them.
In reality, I think it's fair to say anything a "sysadmin tool" can do to
make itself more approachable by sysadmins would be wise.
Sure, "Infrastructure Engineer" is all rage this past decade, and "Engineer"
in terms of computer technology should have CSCE background... However,
making concepts easily understandable to, say, shell/perl scripters vs. only
CS grads should be a real and useful goal of the cf language. IMCO.
Some of this syntax is why I originally shunned puppet... Though I see the
usefulness, in some cases... And must simply appreciate the general
abstraction in others.
--
Mike Hoskins : micho...@cisco.com : +1 (415) 506-UNIX (8649)
He knows not how to know who knows not also how to unknow.
-- Sir Richard Burton
_______________________________________________
Help-cfengine mailing list
Help-cfengine@cfengine.org
https://cfengine.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine
