Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 18:38:04 +0100 From: Cliff Sarginson <cliff@raggedclown.net> To: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: what is a good language for system administration? Message-ID: <20020120173804.GB1952@raggedclown.net> In-Reply-To: <20020120180134.H17795@xs4all.nl> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20020119151248.033629b8@127.0.0.1> <20020119205810.B17795@xs4all.nl> <5.1.0.14.0.20020119151248.033629b8@127.0.0.1> <20020119213601.C17795@xs4all.nl> <5.1.0.14.0.20020120104211.00b0a5d8@127.0.0.1> <20020120180134.H17795@xs4all.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 06:01:34PM +0100, rene@xs4all.nl wrote: > On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 10:46:46AM -0500, Mark Woodson wrote: > > At 09:36 PM 1/19/2002 +0100, you wrote: > > >On Sat, Jan 19, 2002 at 03:13:21PM -0500, Mark Woodson wrote: > > > > At 08:58 PM 1/19/2002 +0100, you wrote: > > > > >I could really use some clues here. PHP comes into mind, but maybe there > > > > >are other better options? > > > > > > > > Other options certainly. Perl for starters. Have you looked at it? > > > > > >yea, I saw some really scary stuff in some perlmongers' email sigs ;-)) > > > > Yeah, well... Python, you could always hack away in the ultimate language, C. > > well, to add my own 2cts after I give you my background which is being a > windowze coder for about 7 years in Delphi, VB and some C++. > I have now switched to the unixes some time ago, to see if the open source > grass really IS greener than the black-box grass of windoze.. > > My philosophy is that I'd rather use a less-complicated language like > pascal or (if must be and the business logic isn't that complicated) Visual > Basic than a complicated language such as C++ or Perl. > > See, the thing is that in C++ or Perl, you often end up figuring out the style > of programming used by 'the guy who tinkered with it before you' instead of > fixing or extending the code at hand. > If several types of coders have had their hands at such code, things often > turn too messy to maintain :( > > Perl / C++ people; I don't aim to put you down, or expect flames in return. > This is just an opinion, and I fully admit that I don't know Perl at all > and C++ only very very shallowly. I saw, didn't like, so turned my back on > those languages... Maybe I was wrong. Convince me, nicely ;-) > Well, the question is about languages for System Administration, which really is not the same thing as languages for System's Programming. Using a compiled language like "C" etc. is really quite inappropriate for systems administration actvivities, not least of which it would be incredibly complex programming in some cases where a one line shell pipe-line would do it. Using an interpreted (using that word loosely) language for these tasks, which is easy to change and test, and is generally not time critical, is the only sensible option. I hope you were not serious about Pascal btw. Possibly the *most* unportable language on the planet. Almost nothing useful can be done in it outside of mathematical computation, without it's extensions, and it's extensions are all different in every incarnation of the language to be found. -- Regards Cliff To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020120173804.GB1952>