Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!mcgill-vision!snorkelwacker!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!uhnix1!sugar!ficc!peter From: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions Subject: Re: What's wrong with this Bourne shell script? Message-ID: Date: 9 Aug 90 16:57:13 GMT References: <1990Aug3.193231.3166@silma.com> <9053@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV> Organization: Xenix Support, FICC Lines: 14 In article <9053@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>, lwall@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV (Larry Wall) writes: > In the second place, Andy asked if there was a better way. Even if *you* > don't think it is a better way, you shouldn't try to keep other people > from helping. Canonical interjection about not depending on Perl for portable scripts. Resigned comment about Perl not being buildable on all systems. > I hate it when people think we're espousing Perl as the One True Way. > Perl is just another tool. Use where appropriate. Don't use where not. Request for example of problem for which shell is appropriate but Perl is not, other than script portability considerations. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' +1 713 274 5180. 'U`