Path: utzoo!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!noao!rutgers!cmcl2!kramden.acf.nyu.edu!brnstnd
From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Newsgroups: alt.sources.d
Subject: Re: NON-SOURCE POSTINGS CONSIDERED HARMFUL!
Message-ID: <11306:Jan2817:58:5291@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Date: 28 Jan 91 17:58:52 GMT
References: <1991Jan25.090627.14302@convex.com> <24078:Jan2516:52:2591@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <7628@sugar.hackercorp.com>
Organization: IR
Lines: 16

In article <7628@sugar.hackercorp.com> karl@sugar.hackercorp.com (Karl Lehenbauer) writes:
> Dan's version of "much more easily done" is different than for most of
> the rest of us, I think.

Be serious, Karl. We're talking about seven simple commands in a
pipeline versus nearly 30 lines of perl to do the same job: namely, get
a list of all names where there are two different executables in PATH.
It's a hell of a lot simpler to let ls, sort, and uniq do the work than
to bother traversing directories, stat()ing files, and keeping arrays of
on thing or another by hand. Surely you agree.

Tom knows the shell script is a lot simpler; that's why he presented
such brilliant arguments against it as ``It doesn't do anything like the
perl script!'' and ``I'm giving you the silent treatment!''

---Dan