From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 4 05:22:42 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40ED016A400 for ; Wed, 4 Jul 2007 05:22:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from perrin@apotheon.com) Received: from host222.ipowerweb.com (host222.ipowerweb.com [66.235.210.10]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 20CEB13C44C for ; Wed, 4 Jul 2007 05:22:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from perrin@apotheon.com) Received: (qmail 99073 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2007 05:17:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO demeter.hydra) (24.9.123.251) by host222.ipowerweb.com with SMTP; 4 Jul 2007 05:17:55 -0000 Received: from demeter.hydra (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by demeter.hydra (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l645MemY040057; Tue, 3 Jul 2007 23:22:40 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from perrin@apotheon.com) Received: (from ren@localhost) by demeter.hydra (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id l645MdN2040056; Tue, 3 Jul 2007 23:22:39 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from perrin@apotheon.com) X-Authentication-Warning: demeter.hydra: ren set sender to perrin@apotheon.com using -f Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 23:22:39 -0600 From: Chad Perrin To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20070704052239.GA40018@demeter.hydra> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, freebsd@celestial.com References: <200707031344.l63DiEbo098703@dc.cis.okstate.edu> <20070703163610.GA6012@ayn.mi.celestial.com> <468b072c.U1AQhNvKe3aLmLhT%perryh@pluto.rain.com> <20070704042903.GB3594@ayn.mi.celestial.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070704042903.GB3594@ayn.mi.celestial.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Cc: freebsd@celestial.com Subject: Re: The worst error message in history belongs to... BIND9! X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 05:22:42 -0000 On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 09:29:03PM -0700, Bill Campbell wrote: > On Tue, Jul 03, 2007, perryh@pluto.rain.com wrote: > >> >> This is actually just the difference between sh and bash ... > >> > > >> >differences in, say, arithmetic handling and loops can sometimes > >> >mean rewriting parts of shell scripts depending on whether it is > >> >going to run in BSD or Linux. > >> > >> That's a major argument for doing things in python or perl as > >> they are consistent across all platforms ... > > > >If one is going to require the installation of something that may > >not be part of a base system, that something might as well be bash :) > > One of the reasons I started using perl almost 20 years ago was > that it was cleaner and more consistent than tying a bunch of > utilities together with the shell (not to mention only having to > master one type of regular expressions :-). > > I now use python for the vast majority of my development work > instead of perl as I find it much cleaner with better object > oriented features. I'm of a similar mind, except that for OOP stuff I prefer Ruby, and for non-OOP stuff I still generally use Perl. Python doesn't really whet my whistle, so to speak. > > When I write shell scripts, I use a very limited set of features > which are /bin/sh compatible. As soon as I start having to do > anything much more than run a program against a list of files, I > switch to python. $language =~ s/python/Perl/ Otherwise, ditto what you said. Much like PHP, I find that shell languages as scripting syntaxes don't really scale well in terms of maintainability. YMMV, of course. -- CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ] Baltasar Gracian: "A wise man gets more from his enemies than a fool from his friends."