|
|
 | | Re: Perl rules!
|
| (...) What demand? Intel and MS _created_ much of todays' demand for computing. They did this to make money. Why do you think another software company other than MS would have been any better? I know you're intelligent, so I'm not prepared to (...) (25 years ago, 22-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | Re: learning languages (was: Re: Perl rules!)
|
| (...) FORTRAN in the same sentence as clean and efficient, without a negative. *shakes head* must be a misparse. Jasper (25 years ago, 22-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | Re: Perl rules!
|
| (...) Well, there's the cause for your stability: Who would want to use a server named barney? ;-) Cheers, - jsproat (25 years ago, 22-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | Re: Perl rules!
|
| (...) Uptime wars! barney:/etc$ uptime 9:31pm up 96 days, 9:27, 1 user, load average: 0.13, 0.03, 0.01 barney:/etc$ Jasper (25 years ago, 22-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | Re: Perl rules!
|
| (...) Actually, it would have been a hell of a lot easier, given that you at elast have homogeneous address space. But you do need to rewrite the kernel to be able to access it at all, and we all know how fast MS is at that sorta thing.. (...) And (...) (25 years ago, 22-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
|
