In article <slrnvmidnd.9vr.apple.universe@freight.zombinet>,
Eric Pozharski <apple.universe@posteo.net> wrote:
>with <87msgourzu.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> Keith Thompson wrote:
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>>> On Sat, 21 Dec 2024 21:09:25 -0800, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>>>>> On Sat, 21 Dec 2024 16:36:32 -0800, Keith Thompson wrote:
>
>*SKIP* [ 8 lines 5 levels deep] # there isn't anything to see
>
>> I can no longer keep up with the rapid movement of the goalposts. I
>> see no point in continuing this discussion.
>
>Point of this (and many others) discussion is to generate engagement.
>Turns out, talking about lizard people doesn't ignite Usenet. Who knew.

Good one. You really got LDO's number to a T.

The funny thing is: I was the one who first brought up: Wouldn't this all
be easier/better/more-maintainable in AWK. And I knew for a dead cold fact
that mentioning AWK would bring the Perl nuts out of the woodwork to attack
AWK and say how much better it would be to use Perl.

I couldn't have been more prescient.

--
Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), who sits on the Judiciary Committee, said it was
"extremely inappropriate" for the president to nominate a Supreme Court justice on a
day ending with the letter "Y", and she said that "Biden is putting the demands of the
radical progressive left ahead of what is best for our nation."

On 12/21/2024 3:09 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Dec 2024 08:13:52 -0600, Ed Morton wrote:
>
>> for anything else you should just use awk ...
>
> If you want to suggest Awk, you might as well use Perl. That does
> everything Awk does, just as concisely, and plenty more besides.

Awk is a mandatory POSIX tool (and so available on all POSIX-compliant
Unix-y systems) with a tiny but powerful language focused on just text
processing, perl is none of that. Also no-one creates cartoons like
https://www.zoitz.com/comics/perl_small.png about awk, nor do they refer
to it as a write-only language, because that is not a common feeling
about the legibility of awk scripts.

Ed.

On 2024-12-23, Kenny McCormack <gazelle@shell.xmission.com> wrote:
> In article <slrnvmidnd.9vr.apple.universe@freight.zombinet>,
> Eric Pozharski <apple.universe@posteo.net> wrote:
>>with <87msgourzu.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> Keith Thompson wrote:
>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>>>> On Sat, 21 Dec 2024 21:09:25 -0800, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>>>>>> On Sat, 21 Dec 2024 16:36:32 -0800, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>
>>*SKIP* [ 8 lines 5 levels deep] # there isn't anything to see
>>
>>> I can no longer keep up with the rapid movement of the goalposts. I
>>> see no point in continuing this discussion.
>>
>>Point of this (and many others) discussion is to generate engagement.
>>Turns out, talking about lizard people doesn't ignite Usenet. Who knew.
>
> Good one. You really got LDO's number to a T.

What would his number be good for? Rather, check out what he volunteered about
himself in his LinkedIn profile:

- Somehow got a Master's in CS, back when Wham came out with _Make it Big_.

- After a 1-2 year gap, went back to the same school and worked for 11
years in "user support".

- Then, essentially unemployed since 1997.

- Never worked in the actually industry in any role, let alone as a dev.

I don't know which way to call it: trust fund baby, or else burger flipper?

Oh, but he's got opinions on everything, including cockamamie code
formatting conventions everyone should be using, but nobody in their
right mind would.

P.S. Don't forget to wake me up before you go-go.

--
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca

On 23.12.2024 14:26, Ed Morton wrote:
>
> https://www.zoitz.com/comics/perl_small.png [...]

There was a not uncommon gap ("little more detail"[*]) in systems
design; above link can obviously fill that gap of how the "miracle"
might get solved (see updated chart[**]).

Janis

[*] https://www.sjaaklaan.com/images/2014-05/solution-shaping-workshops.jpg

[**] http://volatile.gridbug.de/filling-the-gap.jpg

On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 07:26:15 -0600, Ed Morton wrote:

> Awk is a mandatory POSIX tool (and so available on all POSIX-compliant
> Unix-y systems) with a tiny but powerful language focused on just text
> processing, perl is none of that.

Perl is all of that, and more. Text processing is very much the raison
d’être for Perl. Because it turns out it can get quite complicated.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 07:26:15 -0600, Ed Morton wrote:
>> Awk is a mandatory POSIX tool (and so available on all POSIX-compliant
>> Unix-y systems) with a tiny but powerful language focused on just text
>> processing, perl is none of that.
>
> Perl is all of that, and more. Text processing is very much the raison
> d’être for Perl. Because it turns out it can get quite complicated.

It's not "all of that". Perl is not a mandatory POSIX tool.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 15:06:39 -0800, Keith Thompson wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>>
>> On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 07:26:15 -0600, Ed Morton wrote:
>>>
>>> Awk is a mandatory POSIX tool (and so available on all POSIX-compliant
>>> Unix-y systems) with a tiny but powerful language focused on just text
>>> processing, perl is none of that.
>>
>> Perl is all of that, and more. Text processing is very much the raison
>> d’être for Perl. Because it turns out it can get quite complicated.
>
> It's not "all of that". Perl is not a mandatory POSIX tool.

Nobody cares.

On 12/23/2024 4:57 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 07:26:15 -0600, Ed Morton wrote:
>
>> Awk is a mandatory POSIX tool (and so available on all POSIX-compliant
>> Unix-y systems) with a tiny but powerful language focused on just text
>> processing, perl is none of that.
>
> Perl is all of that, and more. Text processing is very much the raison
> d’être for Perl. Because it turns out it can get quite complicated.

Is perl a mandatory POSIX tool? No.
Does perl have a tiny language? No.
Is perl focused on just text processing? No.

So, is perl a mandatory POSIX tool with a tiny language focused on just
text processing? No, as previously mentioned, perl is none of that.

Ed.

In article <vke8u3$1rdnq$1@dont-email.me>,
Ed Morton <mortonspam@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 12/23/2024 4:57 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 07:26:15 -0600, Ed Morton wrote:
>>
>>> Awk is a mandatory POSIX tool (and so available on all POSIX-compliant
>>> Unix-y systems) with a tiny but powerful language focused on just text
>>> processing, perl is none of that.
>>
>> Perl is all of that, and more. Text processing is very much the raison
>> dtre for Perl. Because it turns out it can get quite complicated.
>
>Is perl a mandatory POSIX tool? No.
>Does perl have a tiny language? No.
>Is perl focused on just text processing? No.
>
>So, is perl a mandatory POSIX tool with a tiny language focused on just
>text processing? No, as previously mentioned, perl is none of that.

Does it feel like you are explaining things to a four-year-old?

Because I think you are. And doing a fine job of it.

--
Joni Ernst (2014): Obama should be impeached because 2 people have died of Ebola.
Joni Ernst (2020): Trump is doing great things, because only 65,000 times as many people have died of COVID-19.

Josef Stalin (1947): When one person dies, it is a tragedy; when a million die, it is merely statistics.

with <vkblqk$22oro$1@news.xmission.com> Kenny McCormack wrote:
> In article <slrnvmidnd.9vr.apple.universe@freight.zombinet>,
> Eric Pozharski <apple.universe@posteo.net> wrote:
>>with <87msgourzu.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> Keith Thompson wrote:
>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>>>> On Sat, 21 Dec 2024 21:09:25 -0800, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>>>>>> On Sat, 21 Dec 2024 16:36:32 -0800, Keith Thompson wrote:

>>*SKIP* [ 8 lines 5 levels deep] # there isn't anything to see
>>> I can no longer keep up with the rapid movement of the goalposts. I
>>> see no point in continuing this discussion.
>> Point of this (and many others) discussion is to generate engagement.
>> Turns out, talking about lizard people doesn't ignite Usenet. Who
>> knew.
> Good one. You really got LDO's number to a T.
> The funny thing is: I was the one who first brought up: Wouldn't this
> all be easier/better/more-maintainable in AWK. And I knew for a dead
> cold fact that mentioning AWK would bring the Perl nuts out of the
> woodwork to attack AWK and say how much better it would be to use
> Perl.
> I couldn't have been more prescient.

Thank you for this clear demonstration of how engagement is laid out.

p.s. You do understand that you don't make sense?

p.p.s. You don't have to! It's engagement!

--
Torvalds' goal for Linux is very simple: World Domination
Stallman's goal for GNU is even simpler: Freedom

On Tue, 24 Dec 2024 06:20:18 -0600, Ed Morton wrote:

> Is perl a mandatory POSIX tool? No.

Nobody cares. POSIX compliance is just a means to an end not an end in
itself. Linux pays attention to POSIX where it matters, and ignores it
where it doesn’t.

This is one case where it doesn’t.

On 2024-12-24, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Dec 2024 06:20:18 -0600, Ed Morton wrote:
>
>> Is perl a mandatory POSIX tool? No.
>
> Nobody cares.

That is a false. Enough vendors and system integrators care that you
can hardly log into any Linux box that doesn't have some kind of awk.
Even small IoT devices or consumer routers.

(If it doesn't have Awk, it's almost certainly not going to have Perl.)

The BusyBox project, a popular project that provides userland utilities
for small systems packaged into a single executable, has its own BusyBox
Awk, which is how a good many small embedded systems get their Awk.

BusyBox Awk is implemented in one 100,000 character source file
(that probably relies on some BusyBox library infrastructure.)

There is no BuxyBox Perl and likely won't be any time soon.

> POSIX compliance is just a means to an end not an end in
> itself. Linux pays attention to POSIX where it matters, and ignores it
> where it doesn’t.

That is true, but one area where it matters is in having Awk on a
system, so that shell scripts which rely on Awk do not break.

> This is one case where it doesn’t.

That is nothing but a statement of your personal preference or wishful
thinking, not reflecting the facts of the world at large: as in,
what is widely deployed out there and can be counted on.

--
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca

In article <20241224133404.617@kylheku.com>,
Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> wrote:
....
>> This is one case where it doesnt.
>
>That is nothing but a statement of your personal preference or wishful
>thinking, not reflecting the facts of the world at large: as in,
>what is widely deployed out there and can be counted on.

Arguing with a 4 year old again, are we?

--
People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough
men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

George Orwell