 | | Re: New LUGNET directory structre?
|
|
(...) Okay, I'll start working with that assumption. (...) Do you have a working list of non-ng directories? (...) I uploaded it to my Web site. (URL) unzip it with directories. This is the raw, unadulterated FAQ source, so it's not very pretty. The (...) (26 years ago, 4-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: New LUGNET directory structre?
|
|
(...) Yeah. The new directory structure isn't really new; that is, it's a new way of looking at (viewing) things, but it's the same structure as the ng's, in an almost one-to-one correspondence. The only difference is that there are more directories (...) (26 years ago, 4-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: New LUGNET directory structre?
|
|
(...) Sort of. I'll tell ya what, though...I'll give you a bit more than that, and you can extract whatever you need from it. How's that sound? Here's the URL of a script which generates a tab-delimited page (MIME type text/plain) on-the-fly from (...) (26 years ago, 5-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: New LUGNET directory structre?
|
|
(...) Todd, I'm shocked! Awk? In a Perl world? :-, Cheers, - jsproat (26 years ago, 5-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: awk vs. perl for simple tasks
|
|
(...) Hmmm... I *think* a2p handles this by giving the perl script the "while(<>)" loop. I don't think perl will do that by itself. (...) Check perlvar, in the section on $/ (input record separator) -- in Perl, it can only be a regular string, but (...) (26 years ago, 5-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | awk vs. perl for simple tasks
|
|
(...) Yup! It's a Perl world, but awk is still a great thing! It's hardly my favorite general-purpose programming language, but other than grep and sort and cat and uniq, it's by far my favorite command-line pipe. I think perl has a command line (...) (26 years ago, 5-May-99, to lugnet.faq, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: New LUGNET directory structre?
|
|
(...) It includes a handful more items, plus a quick-n-dirty perl script to convert .faq files to .html, plus the resulting html files. These html files are by no means intended to be the final form, but rather a means to make reading the items (...) (26 years ago, 5-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: New LUGNET directory structre?
|
|
(...) And again. :-P (...) I did get the unanswered items in there, at least. I didn't touch categorization. Instead, I figured, "what the hell, it needs a tree-based browsing page", so I put that into the perl script make_html.cmd. The index file (...) (26 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: New LUGNET directory structre?
|
|
(...) Wicked cool, Jeremy! Off to an awesome start! --Todd (26 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: New LUGNET directory structre?
|
|
(...) Very nice. --Todd (26 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: awk vs. perl for simple tasks
|
|
(...) Aha, here it is: perl -ane (...) FS is awk is the field separator, not the record separator. The record separator in awk is RS. Hmm, doesn't look like Perl has an input field separator -- only an output field separator $, and input/output (...) (26 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: New LUGNET directory structre?
|
|
Todd: (...) How do we integrate the translation of the FAQ with this? We need to translate (and store) column four and five to translate the FAQ. Should we generate a file similar to [1] based on your table, and then add the translations to that (...) (26 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: awk vs. perl for simple tasks
|
|
(...) Hmmm, I don't think I'm old enough for that yet. :-D I've just picked up Perl relatively recently. I'd hesitate to do a 100 Mb STDIO pipe on any MS platform. In DOS and Win16/95/98 (which are single-tasking OS's no matter what MS tells you), (...) (26 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: New LUGNET directory structre?
|
|
(...) Not sure yet...only started seriously thinking about and planning for translation a couple months ago. (...) It couldn't hurt, but I wouldn't say that the wording is stabilized enough to be worth investing much time in this early on. (...) (...) (26 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: New LUGNET directory structre?
|
|
(...) And again. I've re-arranged the FAQ items into Todd's directory structure. There are no new items from last update. A lot of the items I just threw into a dir because I couldn't find a good home for them. And a lot of items need answers... :-P (...) (26 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: awk vs. perl for simple tasks
|
|
(...) That's in reference to the awk idiom: awk '{ print $4 }' which is much longer to do in perl. I personally use this as a shell command inside Emacs all the time. I'm not good at perl one-liners. -Tim (26 years ago, 15-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: awk vs. perl for simple tasks
|
|
(...) Awww, it's not _that_ much longer in perl: perl -alne 'print $F[3]' although it certainly doesn't roll off the tongue quite as nicely. (...) Can't columns be grabbed easily in Scheme/Lisp? --Todd (26 years ago, 15-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: awk vs. perl for simple tasks
|
|
(...) It just occurred to me how useful a live tail util would be. How would you implement one in Perl? Would the one at PPT (1) be the one to check out? Cheers, - jsproat 1. (URL) Jeremy H. Sproat <jsproat@geocities.com> (URL) the Force be with (...) (26 years ago, 18-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: awk vs. perl for simple tasks
|
|
(...) check whether the file size has changed, which, although gross in theory, is perfectly fine in practice if there aren't a zillion copies of it running. Dunno how many Unix implementations have file-change events/signals like NT does, but I'd (...) (26 years ago, 19-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
