On Sat, Aug 19, 2000 at 05:56:31PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Lets see, some regular used feature in Perlk is to use the return
> value of a funktion thats stored in $_ or somthing.
Sure, you CAN do that in Perl, but you don't have to.
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Sat, Aug 19, 2000 at 05:56:31PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Lets see, some regular used feature in Perlk is to use the return
> value of a funktion thats stored in $_ or somthing.
Sure, you CAN do that in Perl, but you don't have to.
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 03:15:04AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Yeah, I hate perl. Its easy to create bugs and hard to fix them.
>
> You can do that in any language. Perl is no different to C in that regard.
> Recently I've been programming a lo
Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 03:15:04AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>wrote:
> > Yeah, I hate perl. Its easy to create bugs and hard to fix them.
>
> You can do that in any language. Perl is no different to C in that regard.
> Recently I've been programming a
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> >
> > Especially the programmers who choose bad languages in the first place.
>
> If there is such a thing, Perl is not one of them.
>
To make clear: I do not hate perl, I'm not very familiar with it (I prefer
awk, when parsing and Pascal or C for o
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> >
> > Especially the programmers who choose bad languages in the first place.
>
> If there is such a thing, Perl is not one of them.
>
To make clear: I do not hate perl, I'm not very familiar with it (I prefer
awk, when parsing and Pascal or C for
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 05:08:38PM +0200, Marius Vollmer wrote:
> Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The language is not at fault, the programmers who use it badly are.
>
> Especially the programmers who choose bad languages in the first place.
If there is such a thing, Perl is not
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 05:08:38PM +0200, Marius Vollmer wrote:
> Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The language is not at fault, the programmers who use it badly are.
>
> Especially the programmers who choose bad languages in the first place.
If there is such a thing, Perl is no
Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> The whole state debconf is best described as "prototype".
Well thank you so much for your observation. It's not true though.
> I'm not very
> experienced in perl, so I never saw a perl-program before that is so much
> less readable than a bad C-code.
>
> But I don't lik
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 05:08:38PM +0200, Marius Vollmer typed:
} Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
}
} > The language is not at fault, the programmers who use it badly are.
}
} Especially the programmers who choose bad languages in the first place.
No kidding. We should throw out C, C
Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> The whole state debconf is best described as "prototype".
Well thank you so much for your observation. It's not true though.
> I'm not very
> experienced in perl, so I never saw a perl-program before that is so much
> less readable than a bad C-code.
>
> But I don't li
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 05:08:38PM +0200, Marius Vollmer typed:
} Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
}
} > The language is not at fault, the programmers who use it badly are.
}
} Especially the programmers who choose bad languages in the first place.
No kidding. We should throw out C,
Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The language is not at fault, the programmers who use it badly are.
Especially the programmers who choose bad languages in the first place.
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 11:52:41AM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> The whole state debconf is best described as "prototype". I'm not very
> experienced in perl, so I never saw a perl-program before that is so much
> less readable than a bad C-code.
Perl can be readable or obfuscated. The language
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 03:15:04AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Yeah, I hate perl. Its easy to create bugs and hard to fix them.
You can do that in any language. Perl is no different to C in that regard.
Recently I've been programming a lot in Tcl; too many inconsistencies
to be a good langua
Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The language is not at fault, the programmers who use it badly are.
Especially the programmers who choose bad languages in the first place.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROT
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 11:52:41AM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> The whole state debconf is best described as "prototype". I'm not very
> experienced in perl, so I never saw a perl-program before that is so much
> less readable than a bad C-code.
Perl can be readable or obfuscated. The languag
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 03:15:04AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Yeah, I hate perl. Its easy to create bugs and hard to fix them.
You can do that in any language. Perl is no different to C in that regard.
Recently I've been programming a lot in Tcl; too many inconsistencies
to be a good lang
On Mon, 14 Aug 2000, Joey Hess wrote:
> Er, debconf includes its own web server. In 256 lines of perl.
> (Shittiest web server on earth too, btw.)
The whole state debconf is best described as "prototype". I'm not very
experienced in perl, so I never saw a perl-program before that is so much
less
On Mon, 14 Aug 2000, Joey Hess wrote:
> Er, debconf includes its own web server. In 256 lines of perl.
> (Shittiest web server on earth too, btw.)
The whole state debconf is best described as "prototype". I'm not very
experienced in perl, so I never saw a perl-program before that is so much
les
>>"goswin" == goswin brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
goswin> I expressed it more clearly on -policy, but just to
goswin> clarify. I completly seperate configuration and installation
goswin> here. Configuration must be interactive, but installation
goswin> must not. Thats MY opinion.
>>"goswin" == goswin brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
goswin> I expressed it more clearly on -policy, but just to
goswin> clarify. I completly seperate configuration and installation
goswin> here. Configuration must be interactive, but installation
goswin> must not. Thats MY opinion.
Seth Cohn wrote:
> Debconf should be able to handle things like that with the 'web' option.
> If you are remotely installing, you shouldn't depend on an ssh or telnet
> session staying up. And vice versa, upgrading a webserver should NOT let
> you use the 'web' option of debconf.
Er, debconf incl
Seth Cohn wrote:
> Debconf should be able to handle things like that with the 'web' option.
> If you are remotely installing, you shouldn't depend on an ssh or telnet
> session staying up. And vice versa, upgrading a webserver should NOT let
> you use the 'web' option of debconf.
Er, debconf inc
> Thats stuff that can actually cost money and if it does you will hate
> the stupid sawfish *sorry, but thats a _absolutly random_ :) name,
> nothing against sawfish, change at will* for bothering you to drive to
> the system and press return.
Debconf should be able to handle things like that wit
> Thats stuff that can actually cost money and if it does you will hate
> the stupid sawfish *sorry, but thats a _absolutly random_ :) name,
> nothing against sawfish, change at will* for bothering you to drive to
> the system and press return.
Debconf should be able to handle things like that wi
26 matches
Mail list logo
