|
|
 | | Re: Perl rules!
|
| (...) Wait a minute. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but the segmented memory architecture allowed you to create absolutely *tiny* programs that did wonderful things. And you could fit tons of these programs on an affordable *floppy* disk. I (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | Re: Perl rules!
|
| (...) And why did IBM stick all the ROM and system stuff in high memory (>640K), rather than low memory? If they had done that, it would have been (more) possible to extend the address space without totally losing backwards compatibility. Or if (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | Re: Perl rules!
|
| [removed lugnet.off-topic.debate from crosspost list] (...) I'd say, back in 1983, the lack of virtual memory and the 640KB limit was no big deal (in the PC industry). By 1989, it was becoming unfortunate. By 1991, it was getting really bad. And by (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | Re: Perl rules!
|
| (...) The 1000-line limit in LEdit was a programming limitation. Nothing to do with anything evil in the OS, unless you consider lack of virtual memory evil (rather than just bad). Was the 8.3 file format originated with MS or DOS? I thought it was (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | Perl taint checking and CGI
|
| Hey Perl fans, Does anyone use the taint checking features of Perl for CGI scripts? Is the only way to turn it on with the -T command-line option? Cheers, - jsproat (25 years ago, 19-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | The way of the Math Geek (was Re: [faq FAQ How do I format an entry in the Lugnet FAQ?]
|
| (...) I actually believe my main reason for doing it was that I had to create hundreds of pages of HTML, and I didn't trust any of the "HTML authoring tools" to do what I wanted. Basically, I thought other people's tools would have bugs or (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jul-99, to lugnet.faq, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | Re: Perl rules!
|
| Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) OK, I'd class those as incompetent rather than poor. Not that I'm pedantic at all. (...) Most likely, as I'm good at misunderstanding things like that. It sounded to me as though you were tending towards saying (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | Re: Perl rules!
|
| (...) Well, I think you're not going to find much love for AIX anywhere. (...) Oh my. I personally like the ability to at least have case retained, but can go either way on whether opening a file is case sensitive. But passwords sure as hell should (...) (25 years ago, 18-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | The Continuing Desecration of Perl, or, www.perl.com (Was: Perl rules!)
|
| AAAAAAAAGH! Has anyone seen what they've done to www.perl.com today!?!?!? They've dumbed it down! It's absolutely *LOADED* with O'Reilly logos and ads! Perl is the tree, and the dog pack of O'Reilly and Associates just pissed on it! I'm more afraid (...) (25 years ago, 18-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | Re: Perl rules!
|
| (...) Yah, no argument there. I prefer the Windows 4 GUI over almost anything else (1), and I can run a wide range of apps on my NT box. But, I know the difference between reliability and popularity, and for mission-critical apps where down time (...) (25 years ago, 18-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
|
