dumb question [on scripting]

[Joel Rees]

On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Paul Allen Newell <pnewell at cs.cmu.edu> wrote:
> [inline]
>
>
> On 1/4/2012 10:08 PM, g wrote:
>>
>> 'wiz kids' of today have no concept of what 'the good old days' where
>> like.
>
>
> That may be a blessing as quite a few of the good old day were really bad
> old days.
>
>
>> you had things easier than i because you worked 'mainframe' where you at
>> least had someone to ask. i had myself and an s100 box with dialup bbs
>> and an 'outside dialin' to access local college 'mainframe' to search it's
>> files and out thru arpanet to other colleges to search. slow, but it
>> usually
>> got results.
>
>
> but I bet you learned more about "how to survive with a computer" given the
> availability of "someone to ask" wasn't something you could count on.
>
>
>> if you look at 10th hit, 'Bash Guide for Beginners', 'Table of Contents',
>> you will see it is main for 5th hit. wherein 'Introduction 1.', 1st
>> paragraph gives a good description of what it is all about.
>>
>> 'Table of Contents' does show a good breakdown of sections and should
>> lend to quick finding of what you may need.
>>
>> i have never really found anything "short" for what i wanted to know
>> about bash or anything else that i needed to find out more about, but
>> i can say that 'tdlp' has covered pretty much of what i was looking for.
>>
>
> I suspect (and hope) this material will keep me off the list for awhile
> (smile)
>
>>
>> most all of my assembler work has been for controllers and c and c++ where
>> just too much bloat to do what i needed. plus, with al, i never had to
>> worry of stack or buffer over flow. ;)
>
>
> My machine code was when there was nothing else and my assembler was in the
> early video games days where all you got was a 4K cartridge and most of the
> time was spent trying to pack a much larger program into that bloody
> cartridge. But assembler was good for me in that it taught me alot about
> being clever and where one needed to be really clever.
>
>
>> i look at it another way, 'why reinvent the wheel'. if you can make what
>> is already written work with scripts, use it, do not write it new. :)
>>
>
> With all due respect, this feels like you are throwing the classic cliche
> over the problem. My comment was much more about effort/gain ratio at an age
> where effort really has to be looked at whether it advances the main chance.
>
> I think we ought to put this thread to bed, its beginning to drift OT
>

What, and deny me the chance to reminisce about an old 6800 protyping
board, building (though not desgining) my own high-speed cassette
interface, designing and building my own dRAM refresh circuit,
hand-assembling and typing in a FORTH interpreter in hex, by hand, and
...

Oh, never mind.

--
Joel Rees