Sujet : Re: lisp scripts
De : dan1espen (at) *nospam* gmail.com (Dan Espen)
Groupes : comp.unix.shellDate : 09. Feb 2025, 22:56:00
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vob89g$r66a$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5
User-Agent : Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+
ng@hotmail.com> writes:
On 09.02.2025 18:21, Dan Espen wrote:
gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) writes:
In article <voajsf$nd2k$1@dont-email.me>,
Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
...
... to Perl.
... something any programmer could readily understand.
>
I'm sure opinions will vary on that.
They guy that wrote the sed/awk stuff agreed.
>
Curious; do you mean the authors of those languages or the
authors (pl.) of that unspecific mentioned "sed & awk" book?
>
Given clarity/cryptically of syntax (and their semantics)
these three languages (Awk, Perl, Sed) for sure vary a lot!
This was an app developed by one of my co-workers.
The app consisted of many shell scripts and many invocations of
awk and sed. There were dozens of files in the app. I was trying to
fix it and worked on it for quite some time before I decided it was too
many files and too many different languages being used.
I ended up re-writing the whole thing as a single Perl script.
The whole thing was all in one file and much easier to understand.
As I said, the original author agreed.
Perl can be cryptic if you use the cryptic parts of the language.
I don't.
-- Dan Espen