7 May
2002
7 May
'02
2:30 a.m.
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Erlacher [mailto:edick@idcomm.com]
> Maybe they're willing to type a couple lines
for the sake of
> the added reliability, maybe it's easier for them to type
Now just a minute there, Chris ... You don't make
any fewer
typos than I do
Nope, and I handle it fine.
and if I had to type a line of gibberish such as what
you
showed us all a week
or so ago and then figure out what was mistyped I'd go blind.
You do realize that any sane person would never write code that
looks like that, unless he were using TECO? ;)
At any rate, that was Perl. There is a windows port too, and
it's certainly not a requirement.
Every keystroke
is a mistake waiting to happen. How do more keystrokes make
it more reliable?
I think you may have misread me there. It's not the keystrokes
that make it reliable, it's the underlying system that accepts
them. Remember, I don't trust windows. (Possibly more than
you distrust Unix...)
I'd rather use a command line system and know (or at least
believe ;) that it will do what I ask without having anything
explode, and without making me wait until it finishes thrashing
itself into oblivion.
Admittedly, windows is better recently on those two counts, but
I can not trust it to stay that way, and it's not good enough
yet, anyway.
Unfortunately, I'm forced to use windows in my work, (I assume
and hope that you're no longer forced to use Unix in yours) so
I imagine that I have a fairly good idea of the current windows
platform. It still strikes me as severely lacking in several
departments (some subjective, and some not), including
reliability.
Chris
Christopher Smith, Perl Developer
Amdocs - Champaign, IL
/usr/bin/perl -e '
print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl
Hacker.")."\x08!\n");
'