|
|
 | | Re: Idea for automatic Lugnet Set Database linking
|
| (...) Or you can do the opposite and require special markup around the number to be considered a set # for automatic linking. Some ideas: I'd really like to my hands on a set:5952-2: soon! I'd really like to my hands on a <SET>5952-2</SET> soon! (...) (25 years ago, 22-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.publish, lugnet.admin.database)
| | | | | Re: Perl rules!
|
| (...) *shake* not quite true. HAve you ever learned a language foreign to you? I'v ebeen lucky enough to learn English as virtually a second mother language (early start, mostly), but I've also learnt French, German, Latin and ancient Greek (to (...) (25 years ago, 22-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | Re: Perl rules!
|
| (...) From what I've heard, neither can NT, really. Especially since IE tends to store its cache in user space, which then gets transported right around campus over the network everry time someone logs on... Combine that with the 10 Mb ethernet (...) (25 years ago, 22-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | Re: Perl rules!
|
| (...) Our chief weapon is Open Source. And freedom. Our two chief weapons are Open Source, freedom, and emacs. Oh. Our three chief weapons are Open Source, freedom, emacs, and vim. Oh, sod it. Jasper "Nobody expects... Richard Stallman!" Janssen (25 years ago, 22-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | Re: Perl rules!
|
| (...) Much as I would like to believe that sometimes IBM and MS are capable of creating something (1), this is one thing they simply grabbed and ran with. The *need* was already there; they simply told consumers that the *want* was there, only a few (...) (25 years ago, 22-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | 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)
|
|
