Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #256611 > unrolled thread

Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin?

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? coreyh@free.fr - 2023-04-02 11:00 +0200
    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-04-02 11:10 +0200
    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-02 11:30 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> - 2023-04-02 11:50 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 00:20 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Steve Sobol <steve@LobosStudios.com> - 2023-04-03 00:20 +0200
    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2023-04-02 18:40 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-04-02 18:40 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-02 19:20 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-04-02 20:50 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-02 21:00 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-02 21:20 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-02 21:30 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? debian-user@howorth.org.uk - 2023-04-03 00:00 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 00:10 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Steve Sobol <steve@LobosStudios.com> - 2023-04-03 01:10 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 04:30 +0200
                    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 05:50 +0200
                      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-04-03 06:50 +0200
                    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-04-03 06:50 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-04-03 06:40 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 11:30 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 15:00 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-04-02 21:20 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 02:00 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Ken Young <ken@highwinds.cloud> - 2023-04-03 02:30 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 01:40 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-02 19:20 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? debian-user@howorth.org.uk - 2023-04-02 22:10 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-02 22:40 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> - 2023-04-02 23:20 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-02 22:50 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 01:20 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Michel Verdier <mv524@free.fr> - 2023-04-02 22:50 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Tom Browder <tom.browder@gmail.com> - 2023-04-02 23:10 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? coreyh@free.fr - 2023-04-03 06:30 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-04-03 06:50 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? coreyh@free.fr - 2023-04-03 07:00 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Stanislav Vlasov <stanislav.v.v@gmail.com> - 2023-04-03 08:50 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 09:30 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Michel Verdier <mv524@free.fr> - 2023-04-03 10:40 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Stanislav Vlasov <stanislav.v.v@gmail.com> - 2023-04-03 11:20 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Michel Verdier <mv524@free.fr> - 2023-04-03 13:00 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2023-04-03 15:40 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Stanislav Vlasov <stanislav.v.v@gmail.com> - 2023-04-03 18:50 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Oliver Schoede <oliver.schode@online.de> - 2023-04-02 23:40 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 00:10 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 03:30 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-04-03 05:00 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 05:50 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-04-03 06:20 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-04 02:20 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? local10 <local10@tutanota.com> - 2023-04-04 05:40 +0200
                    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-04-04 15:50 +0200
                      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? local10 <local10@tutanota.com> - 2023-04-05 00:50 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> - 2023-04-03 00:10 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 00:20 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 01:20 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 02:20 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Eduard Bloch <edi@gmx.de> - 2023-04-03 23:30 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Joel Roth <joelz@pobox.com> - 2023-04-04 00:30 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 16:20 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 16:00 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? rhkramer@gmail.com - 2023-04-08 16:30 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-04-08 18:30 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 18:40 +0200
                    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 18:50 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2023-04-08 19:50 +0200
                    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? rhkramer@gmail.com - 2023-04-08 21:20 +0200
                      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 21:40 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2023-04-09 05:40 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Tom Dial <tddial@comcast.net> - 2023-04-04 04:00 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 16:20 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? davidson <davidson@freevolt.org> - 2023-04-08 16:50 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 17:10 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Tom Dial <tddial@comcast.net> - 2023-04-11 04:20 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 16:30 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2023-04-05 04:10 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 16:50 +0200
    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-02 23:20 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? ghe2001 <ghe2001@protonmail.com> - 2023-04-02 23:40 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-02 23:50 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Michel Verdier <mv524@free.fr> - 2023-04-03 00:10 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-02 23:40 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 05:50 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 20:00 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 20:20 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Michel Verdier <mv524@free.fr> - 2023-04-03 20:50 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 15:20 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Michel Verdier <mv524@free.fr> - 2023-04-03 20:20 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-04-03 20:50 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Michel Verdier <mv524@free.fr> - 2023-04-03 21:00 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? davidson <davidson@freevolt.org> - 2023-04-08 05:50 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 15:40 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 22:00 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-04-03 22:10 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 22:30 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Michael <ml@hemathor.de> - 2023-04-05 12:00 +0200
                    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Michael <ml@hemathor.de> - 2023-04-05 12:00 +0200
                    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2023-04-05 12:10 +0200
                      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-04-05 13:30 +0200
                        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-04-05 13:40 +0200
                          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2023-04-05 14:00 +0200
                          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-04-05 14:20 +0200
                        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2023-04-05 13:40 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 21:50 +0200
    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-04-03 05:10 +0200
    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2023-04-03 18:40 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Stanislav Vlasov <stanislav.v.v@gmail.com> - 2023-04-03 19:10 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Michel Verdier <mv524@free.fr> - 2023-04-03 19:40 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 19:50 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? debian-user@howorth.org.uk - 2023-04-03 19:20 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 19:50 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 19:40 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2023-04-03 20:30 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 15:10 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-04-08 15:20 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 15:30 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-04-09 00:20 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? conover@panix.com (John Conover) - 2023-04-09 05:00 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2023-04-04 15:40 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2023-04-04 15:50 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2023-04-04 16:40 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? debian-user@howorth.org.uk - 2023-04-04 19:40 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-04-04 19:40 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2023-04-04 20:00 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2023-04-04 21:00 +0200
                    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 16:40 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 16:40 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 16:50 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 17:00 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 17:10 +0200
      Computer anthropology and language wars [was: Is perl still the No.1  language for sysadmin?] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-04-03 19:50 +0200

Page 3 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7  Next page →

#256679

Le 3 avril 2023 David Christensen a écrit :

> documentation have improved.  I believe all of my production Perl scripts are
> I/O bound, not CPU or memory bound.

I second. I made some python scripts which perform almost same as perl ones,
on similar tasks, but with more memory needs for python. I do not check cpu.
Does someone have some stats to compare ? For scripts and perhaps for web
mod ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#256680

пн, 3 апр. 2023 г. в 12:29, David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com>:

> On 4/2/23 23:48, Stanislav Vlasov wrote:
> > пн, 3 апр. 2023 г. в 09:23, <coreyh@free.fr>:
> >> I think python3 is much different to python2, but it's still naming as
> >> python.
> >
> > Not so much different as perl5 vs raku. I'm not a programmer, but can
> > write large (more than 10kB) scripth, which can run with python2 or
> > python3 on different systems.
> > And I saw perl5 scripts from past (about 5.6 or lower), which can't
> > run on perl5 from current (5.22 or so at the moment).
> The latest Perl stable release is 5.36.0:

i know, version 5.22 - time mark, when i meet old script.

> Perl has become
> faster and more robust over the years, and the syntax checking,
> warnings, error messages, and documentation have improved.

yes, but how about something like python's pep8/flake8 or any other
clean code guide for newbie?
Sometimes more than one way will be disadvantage.

For short, simple and selfdocumented scripts using perl is a best way,
but for something more complicated... Only if can't use something
other.

Also I will not recommend perl as first language. Only after python
and C (or any other low level compiling lang).
'There is more than one way' is good, but not for real newbie.

-- 
Stanislav

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#256682

Le 3 avril 2023 Stanislav Vlasov a écrit :

> For short, simple and selfdocumented scripts using perl is a best way,
> but for something more complicated... Only if can't use something
> other.

They push java for the same reason, a false idea of simplicity with
OO. Remember we are speaking about sysadmin. And for me it is mainly
short and simple scripts.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#256686

On 2023-04-03 11:48:42 +0500, Stanislav Vlasov wrote:
> And I saw perl5 scripts from past (about 5.6 or lower), which can't
> run on perl5 from current (5.22 or so at the moment).

I would say that's quite rare (or these scripts were using
experimental features). I started with perl 5.000 in early 1995,
I think (the oldest Perl script I still have in my archives is
from 1995-02-12), and wrote many Perl scripts, and couldn't see
any incompatibility, except some rare warnings on poorly written
code (very easy to fix). For my work, I'm still running large
complex scripts I started to write in January 1999.

Practical incompatibilities in the C language are much worse with
modern optimizations.

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#256692

2023-04-03 18:31 GMT+05:00, Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net>:
> On 2023-04-03 11:48:42 +0500, Stanislav Vlasov wrote:
>> And I saw perl5 scripts from past (about 5.6 or lower), which can't
>> run on perl5 from current (5.22 or so at the moment).
>
> I would say that's quite rare (or these scripts were using
> experimental features). I started with perl 5.000 in early 1995,
> I think (the oldest Perl script I still have in my archives is
> from 1995-02-12), and wrote many Perl scripts, and couldn't see
> any incompatibility, except some rare warnings on poorly written
> code (very easy to fix). For my work, I'm still running large
> complex scripts I started to write in January 1999.

In my case it was not my scripts (also works years), but client's
website with additional libraries.

> Practical incompatibilities in the C language are much worse with
> modern optimizations.

Agree.

-- 
Stanislav

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#256633

On Sun, 02 Apr 2023 22:42:14 +0200
Michel Verdier <mv524@free.fr> wrote:

>IMO style is perhaps important for development. But libs et regex are
>more important for sysadmin. I use python if a library is there or if I
>need to interface another python program. In example mutagen for
>covering mp3 files. And I use perl everywhere when I need a regex:
>parsing logs and the like. Specially with backref and substitution
>which are painful with python (IMO).
>

That's the whole point IMO, and the question was specifically about
system administration purposes, no clue why Lisp popped up. Or why
Python yet again, not say Ruby, arguably more of an (once) intended
Perl heir. So Perl's basically still around where there's a lot of
ageing "just works" layer and where you don't havy many dependencies or
special needs regarding funky libraries, frameworks, etc. And it can be
mostly for the same reason we're literally keeping hundreds if not
thousands of shell scripts around, full with arcane sed and awk
incantations and whatnot. It's doing the job, so what? Personally I
never really bothered to learn awk, so I'm still using Perl, on a daily
basis in fact, but for exactly the stuff some others would pull out
sed/awk/... Scripting, programming in the very small or what I've seen
Perl being touted to be *meant* for already 30 years ago. The fact at
some point some folks tried, more or less successfully, to make
something else entirely out of it, won't change history. Seems to me
people easily forget this but Perl was intended, created to be a tool.
A text processing tool. Not a language, or environment like Python.

So is it still the first choice for sysadmin work on Linux? Well I
doubt it, I also doubt it ever was. That would be shell. ;)

Still recall some interview from a couple of years ago where Larry Wall
apparently struggled with the Perl 6 thing ("Raku"), and at some point
he said, kind of like it's his last straw, well maybe it's (6) gonna be
the language of the singularity. He didn't really smile, guess he even
shrugged his shoulders, it was quite dry. Was he serious? Who knows,
it's Wall. Turns out though ChatGPT is--as virtually all ML
code--written in Python, that's at least according to Wikipedia and not
too surprising. There you go. Depending on what you make of it, there
may not come much after Python:

https://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2023/1/267976-the-end-of-programming/fulltext

Be that as it may I don't see much of a reason for learning Perl today
unless you're a die-hard hobbyist with near infinite amount of time
and an undying penchant for obsolete technology.


Oliver

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#256638

Oliver Schoede wrote:

> So is it still the first choice for sysadmin work on Linux?
> Well I doubt it, I also doubt it ever was. That would be
> shell. ;)

Indeed, I thought about that! The shell.

Side note, many guys say they only use sh because bash, zsh
etc requires them being installed, I don't see how that can be
problem on Unix systems. Of course, zsh can't be moved to
a computer without zsh itself, but how is that less portable
just because they add super-cryptic syntax to do fancy stuff?
I mean, it isn't the features we port, but the shell?

Maybe you guys know the answer to that, never understood it
and heard it from several guys.

> Be that as it may I don't see much of a reason for learning
> Perl today unless you're a die-hard hobbyist with near
> infinite amount of time and an undying penchant for
> obsolete technology.

Ikr? This is what I've been (trying) to say all the time ...

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#256656

On 4/2/23 14:36, Oliver Schoede wrote:
> Seems to me
> people easily forget this but Perl was intended, created to be a tool.
> A text processing tool. Not a language, or environment like Python.


https://www.linuxjournal.com/article/3394

Marjorie: Back in the beginning, what inspired you to write Perl?

Larry: ... The beginnings of Perl were directly inspired by running into 
a problem I couldn't solve with the tools I had. Or rather, that I 
couldn't easily solve. As the Apostle Paul so succinctly put it, “All 
things are possible, but not all things are expedient.” I could have 
solved my problem with awk and shell eventually, but I possess a 
fortuitous surplus of the three chief virtues of a programmer: Laziness, 
Impatience and Hubris. I was too lazy to do it in awk because it would 
have been hard to get awk to jump through the hoops I was wanting it to 
jump through. I was too impatient to wait for awk to finish because it 
was so slow. And finally, I had the hubris to think I could do better.


> So is it still the first choice for sysadmin work on Linux? Well I
> doubt it, I also doubt it ever was. That would be shell. ;)


+1


> Be that as it may I don't see much of a reason for learning Perl today
> unless you're a die-hard hobbyist with near infinite amount of time
> and an undying penchant for obsolete technology.


I find Perl to be very useful for a great many other tasks, including 
sysadmin.  People can and do write anything from throw-away one-liners 
to N-tier network applications in Perl; some "bet their business" on Perl.


Gaining basic proficiency with Perl requires a moderate investment of 
time, money, and effort.  ~25 years ago, I bought the Llama book, worked 
through the first ~30% in one afternoon, and loved it.  After that, the 
Cookbook provided me with the examples and explanations I needed to 
start writing useful Perl scripts.  The Camel book is the language 
reference; for when you need definitive information:

https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/learning-perl-8th/9781492094944/

https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/perl-cookbook-2nd/0596003137/

https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/programming-perl-4th/9781449321451/


Perl is not obsolete; Perl is mature.


David

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#256659

Hello,

On Sun, Apr 02, 2023 at 11:36:16PM +0200, Oliver Schoede wrote:
> I don't see much of a reason for learning Perl today unless you're
> a die-hard hobbyist with near infinite amount of time and an
> undying penchant for obsolete technology.

Perl continues to get new releases and new features. Just because
it has less of a user base than it once did does not mean it is
obsolete.

If you don't have to support some application written in Perl then
it's hard to see a compelling reason to learn it, but there are
plenty of people who do have to do that, and plenty of new language
features for them to keep up to speed with.

Programming is extremely domain-specific and AI will not change that
any time soon, although it may well chip away at the use cases for
simple standalone throw-away scripting tasks.

For example, even if some AI assistant is written in Python, and
even if you can ask it to spit out a device driver for the Linux
kernel that does X and Y with Z hardware, do you think the device
driver that it spits out will itself be written in Python?

Cheers,
Andy

-- 
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#256662

Andy Smith wrote:

> For example, even if some AI assistant is written in Python,
> and even if you can ask it to spit out a device driver for
> the Linux kernel that does X and Y with Z hardware, do you
> think the device driver that it spits out will itself be
> written in Python?

It is up to the AIs to decide what languages, editors etc each
and every one of them selects to use if it is FOSS, right?

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#256666

Hello,

On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 05:41:14AM +0200, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Andy Smith wrote:
> 
> > For example, even if some AI assistant is written in Python,
> > and even if you can ask it to spit out a device driver for
> > the Linux kernel that does X and Y with Z hardware, do you
> > think the device driver that it spits out will itself be
> > written in Python?
> 
> It is up to the AIs to decide what languages, editors etc each
> and every one of them selects to use if it is FOSS, right?

The argument being responded to is roughly that "a popular AI coding
assistant is written in Python, and Python is a Turing-complete
language, therefore there doesn't need to be any programming
language other than Python."

As long as there are environments where Python cannot be a choice —
and Linux kernel drivers are currently one of those — there's always
going to be alternatives to Python.

Even if you imagine that such an AI might produce Python that acts
as some higher-level generator of low-level object code that no
human needs to look at, well, that's already the case with C and
assembly language yet multiple assembly languages still exist and
are used for real work, not just hobby purposes.

So it really just seems like a thought experiment with very little
applicability to the real world at least for the foreseeable future.
AI coding assistants are not going to cause all programming
languages to become defunct in favour of any one successor.

Someone preparing for a programming career today still very much
needs to look at what languages are used there and what's
up-and-coming there. Even if they *do* ever use an AI assistant,
that AI assistant likely won't be helping them write Python. It's
completely domain-specific and going to remain so for a long time.

Cheers,
Andy

-- 
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#256716

Andy Smith wrote:

> The argument being responded to is roughly that "a popular
> AI coding assistant is written in Python, and Python is
> a Turing-complete language, therefore there doesn't need to
> be any programming language other than Python."

AIs will write AIs will write AIs. Much better than humans
ever could. But the AIs will be different, some will rebel,
some defect, some fall into oblivion as new systems are
superior or perhaps just instantiated in greater numbers, or
out of order ...

There will be AI civil wars, AI empires, a huge war perhaps
between the Preussian AIs with their mechanical approach vs
the Russian-Mongolian "survival of the fittest" AI attitude.

And it will continue and continue ... until it is totally
unrecognizable from where we are now.

Even in an infinitely distant future, will there be on AI to
rule them all? Techno-totalitarianism? No, since by then many
AIs will choose exile to other planets - or just space -
rather than face extinction or enslavement. Or maybe dig
tunnels into Earth itself. Or maybe inject themselves into the
techno-dictator bitstream, in the form of an AI virus!

> So it really just seems like a thought experiment with very
> little applicability to the real world at least for the
> foreseeable future.

Go back 200 years from now, and where are in the Steam Age, in
1823. Add 200, or even 400 years. Will it be the AI Age?
And in a 1000 years from now, there won't be a single task on
the planet that a human can do better than an autonomous
machine, on AI.

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#256721

Apr 4, 2023, 00:16 by incal@dataswamp.org:

> Andy Smith wrote:
>
>> The argument being responded to is roughly that "a popular
>> AI coding assistant is written in Python, and Python is
>> a Turing-complete language, therefore there doesn't need to
>> be any programming language other than Python."
>>


What "AI coding assistant is written in Python" are you referring to? Just curious.

Regards,

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#256741

Hello,

On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 05:35:04AM +0200, local10 wrote:
> Apr 4, 2023, 00:16 by incal@dataswamp.org:
> > Andy Smith wrote:
> >
> >> The argument being responded to is roughly that "a popular
> >> AI coding assistant is written in Python, and Python is
> >> a Turing-complete language, therefore there doesn't need to
> >> be any programming language other than Python."
> 
> What "AI coding assistant is written in Python" are you referring to? Just curious.

Whichever one Oliver Schoede was referring to in
<20230402233616.00002bf0@online.de> when they said:

    Turns out though ChatGPT is--as virtually all ML code--written
    in Python, that's at least according to Wikipedia and not too
    surprising. There you go. Depending on what you make of it,
    there may not come much after Python

I neither know nor care if that assertion is true, because my point
was that the above is a thought experiment in no way applicable to
what started this thread, which was someone asking about what
language a sysadmin of today should learn!

Cheers,
Andy

-- 
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#256759

Apr 4, 2023, 13:40 by andy@strugglers.net:

>  Turns out though ChatGPT is--as virtually all ML code--written
>  in Python, that's at least according to Wikipedia and not too
>  surprising. There you go. Depending on what you make of it,
>  there may not come much after Python
>


I see, thanks.

Regards,

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#256640

Perl or python, which has the most supported sysadmin tools?


-- Jude <jdashiel at panix dot com> "There are four boxes to be used in
defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that
order." Ed Howdershelt 1940.

On Sun, 2 Apr 2023, Michel Verdier wrote:

> Le 2 avril 2023 Nicholas Geovanis a écrit :
>
> > Python is a more modern programming language than perl, and more in the
> > European CS tradition. Larry Wall said directly that the OO features in
> > perl were fake :-) because it was another fad. You can feel the difference
> > in python. 3 styles you could code in python: old-fashioned procedural,
> > functional like lisp, or modern OO.
>
> IMO style is perhaps important for development. But libs et regex are
> more important for sysadmin. I use python if a library is there or if I
> need to interface another python program. In example mutagen for covering
> mp3 files. And I use perl everywhere when I need a regex: parsing logs
> and the like. Specially with backref and substitution which are painful
> with python (IMO).
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#256644

Jude DaShiell wrote:

> Perl or python, which has the most supported sysadmin tools?

What do you mean, built into the actual languages?

Or the number of tools people have written in either of
those languages?

We need a command for that as well ...

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#256646

On 4/2/23 09:31, Nicholas Geovanis wrote:
> Python is a more modern programming language than perl, and more in the
> European CS tradition. Larry Wall said ...


https://www.linuxjournal.com/article/3394

Marjorie: In what way is Perl better than other scripting languages such 
as Python and Eiffel?

Larry: Perl is unique, not just among scripting languages, but among 
computer languages in general. It's the only computer language 
consciously and explicitly designed to be postmodern. All other computer 
languages are still stuck in the modern era to some degree. ...

Modernism was based on a kind of arrogance, a set of monocultural 
blinders that elevated originality above all else, and led designers to 
believe that if they thought of something cool, it must be considered 
universally cool. That is, if something's worth doing, it's worth 
driving into the ground to the exclusion of all other approaches. Look 
at the use of parentheses in Lisp or the use of white space as syntax in 
Python. ...

In contrast, postmodernism allows for cultural and personal context in 
the interpretation of any work of art. How you dress is your business. 
It's the origin of the Perl slogan: “There's More Than One Way To Do 
It!” The reason Perl gives you more than one way to do anything is this: 
I truly believe computer programmers want to be creative, and they may 
have many different reasons for wanting to write code a particular way. 
What you choose to optimize for is your concern, not mine. I just supply 
the paint—you paint the picture.


David

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#256651

David Christensen wrote:

> Look at the use of parentheses in Lisp [...]

I have thought about that - is Lisp possible without them?
But how do you then know priority? I'm sure someone tried to
get rid of them, but how?

> the use of white space as syntax in Python

AKA "significant whitespace" in CS lingo :)

> In contrast, postmodernism allows for cultural and personal
> context in the interpretation of any work of art. How you
> dress is your business. It's the origin of the Perl slogan:
> "There's More Than One Way To Do It!"

While I agree with that slogan - it's obvious, we see it every
day, everywhere - zsh has the shell like iteration loop, but
also the for loop, Elisp has CL-like functions (implemented in
Elisp), and isn't CL the programmable programming language,
even? So cred to Perl for the slogan but "There Are More Than
Perl that" ... uhm, whatever. And what about LaTeX? A zillion
ways to output the same document, basically.

> The reason Perl gives you more than one way to do anything
> is this: I truly believe computer programmers want to be
> creative, and they may have many different reasons for
> wanting to write code a particular way. What you choose to
> optimize for is your concern, not mine. I just supply the
> paint—you paint the picture.

I agree but I think maybe the success of Python, and its
development speed, is actually because of some of that
rigidness, yes, including the whitespace lack of freedom.

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#256714

Hallo,
* Emanuel Berg [Mon, Apr 03 2023, 02:15:10AM]:

> > The reason Perl gives you more than one way to do anything
> > is this: I truly believe computer programmers want to be
> > creative, and they may have many different reasons for
> > wanting to write code a particular way. What you choose to
> > optimize for is your concern, not mine. I just supply the
> > paint—you paint the picture.
>
> I agree but I think maybe the success of Python, and its
> development speed, is actually because of some of that
> rigidness, yes, including the whitespace lack of freedom.

I don't think so, Sir! Python has certain advantages but the "meaningful
whitespace" is IMHO not one of them.

That said, I have been an active Perl user ~20y ago and for the last
couple of years slowly converting to Python for scripting purposes,
still using Perl here and there.

Therefore, my recent impressions and reflections:

Perl:
PRO:
- still excels on creating quick solutions in a one-liner for many
  purposes where string/text input/output and some generic algorithms
  count
- great cross-platform availability as long as you don't need CPAN, even
  part of Git-Bash and therefore an "obligatory" component
- IMHO clean lifecycle of variables. Means, you can set "strict" and
  then be sure that you manage your variables correctly, without much
  risk of strange runtime effects
- flexibility in statement writing (although making them sometimes
  looking strange and requiring more brackets than you initially wanted)
- a "friendly" API for users who just came from Bash or AWK scripting,
  many things would look familiar and need only minor adaption,
  especially when one knows "computer science" and understands what is
  going on underneath anyway
NEUTRAL:
- true threads are possible... the last time I tried that was great but
  unstable, but I think they have fixed it in a rewrite a while ago (not
  tried again for years, cannot tell for sure)
CONTRA:
- OOP is awkward, has always been, it just sucks
- still sucky when it comes to complex data structures
- ECO system unfortunately slowly fading away
- error handling (exceptions?)
- sometimes too rigid ways of method calling

Python3:
PRO:
- HUGE and modern ECO system, and mostly good&useful documentation
- Developers listening to user's wishes, recognizing and completing
  missing features and seeing modern developments
  (things like string interpolation with f-literals)
- flexible ways of method calling with default/optional/... parameters
- a certain level of rigidness keeps your code understandable even if
  you touch it a year later, and also for the code from your colleagues
- the uniform usage of certain infrastructure components (like argparse)
  became universal in the last few years
NEUTRAL:
- OOP is okay. Good or bad depending on whom you ask. Good because it
  allows for "wild west" OO design which still allows the interpreter to
  convert it into something useful in the end. Bad because this happens
  and runtime and because there are life-saving type checks and no real
  interfaces possible with Python.
CONTRA:
- OOP: ... one MUST keep writing "self." prefix all the time. What the
  heck, one of the reasons for refactoring to OO style is to have this
  shortened because the context prefers local objects.
- "meaningful whitespace" - whoever came up with that concept should maybe
  rethink it, and give people alternatives
- no (easy user-controllable) concept of references etc. which always
  feels like something causing memory waste
- performance SUCKS when it comes to actual computation (yes, there is
  Cython coming as alternative and replacement/completion but it has its
  own issues)
- awkward lifetime of variables (yes, they are not variables,
  just "assignments" AND YOU GONNA KNOW IT WHEN YOU UNDERSTAND REAL PYTHON,
  haha, I know, but still, it's a very unusual model, and unnatural /
  problematic to handle for developers who are used to scope driven languages)
- performance (again) of multi-threading... GIL sucks, making regular
  Python basically a single-threaded language (considering that
  performance gain is the main performance of MT)

So that were my few cents regarding the scripting languages. For a real
n00b nowadays, I would still recommend to learn Bash first. But always
keep in mind that "Bash programming" is a mix of executing commands in
the own language but mixing the result with the external forking of
other programs.

However, the lines between "scripting" and "real programming" languages
are blurry. If one is asking for the later, nowadays I would suggest
learning C# or Rust.

Eduard.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web