Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Martin Gregorie Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Javascript replacing Java? Date: Wed, 17 May 2017 00:13:06 -0000 (UTC) Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 49 Message-ID: References: <75947fa8-5d0c-415c-b2f1-78ccd38293a3@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Wed, 17 May 2017 00:13:06 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="c6f9d215c7939542b4236d0271a26f15"; logging-data="6868"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/yHmHhH4G/uvd7GoM9bZmGUvPVy9dFfmc=" User-Agent: Pan/0.141 (Tarzan's Death; 168b179 git.gnome.org/pan2) Cancel-Lock: sha1:9FPW+W7u9Ct/v3dl5xwXgpK3oLA= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:36638 On Tue, 16 May 2017 19:14:56 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote: > On 5/16/2017 6:43 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote: >> On Mon, 15 May 2017 19:08:49 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>> In fact I am pretty sure that your favorite shell script language is >>> not strong typed. >>> >> Thats a fair point, but when you look a bit closer, you soon see that >> it is really only using String variables. Sure, some (process exit >> codes) are ints but nobody dies anything but comparisons with them so >> there would be little difference if they were actually strings. >> >> Yes, you can do arithmetic in a shell script, but to do that you need >> to use the expr utility, which is written in C, to evaluate even simple >> arithmetic or logical expressions and more complex string operations. > > That used to be the case. But I believe that they have added arithmetic > capabilities. > [ runs "man bash" ] .. so I see. I thought that only csh did this. It looks quite a bit better/more comprehensive than expr I also see that bash has swiped Perl's =~ operator and now understands POSIX regexes as well Thanks for the heads-up. I should reread manpages a bit more often BTW, in the dim, dark past I've also used strongly typed command languages: ICL's 2900 command language was both typed and block structured: the best thumbnail description I can give is that it was effectively Algol 68 with i/o and type declarations removed and panoramic conditionals added. It could be run line by line as you typed it in or written as a text file and compiled. Yes, you did declare types variables before using them. IBM's OS/400 did more or less the same though it wasn't quite so powerful. The similarity shouldn't be surprising because both OSen were designed in the late 60s/early 70s and both were for new mainframe architectures. ICL's 2900 series replaced the 1900 series while IBM's Future Series was meant to replace the 360/370 range but got cancelled and then resurrected over a decade later as the AS/400 range, now known as iSeries. -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org |