Perl makes a great choice. 95% of the things I used to do in shell script, I now do in Perl instead (the exceptions mostly being system scripts where I'm espescially paranoid about security or stability).
If you're worried about writing a script which needs to be secured you should be writing it in Perl, rather than a shell language.
With Perls concept of taint'ed data you're probably more secure than with any Shell script you come up with..
Given the rising popularity of Linux its only a matter of time untill the script kiddies start to use it in a serious way, this seems to be happening already, as lot of the remote DoS attacks against Windows are written for Linux/NetBSD.
Given that it seems like its just a matter of time untill the Linux virus becomes an interesting challenge to these users.
As for the defense that Unix virusses must be run as root to compromise a system - don't you believe it, this is just giving you a false sense of security.
There are many, many remote loopholes in well-known pieces of software that could potentially allow another internet worm-type virus to spread; especially against the new Linux users..
> but I think that someone should really try to fancy it up and release a professional IDE/compiler/libraries set that is capable of making real-world appications.
Well, if you follow Douglas Adams, we're all part of a giant computer program to compute the answer the to meaning of life.
I guess that means we can add the Meaning of Life by Monty Python to this thread, and the entire Hitch-hikers guide to the universe collection as well... if books qualify.
When I went looking for a PC last time round I knew that I wanted something sexy, with lots of nice toys.
So I looked at some of the big combined packages, thinks like PC + scanner + printer + CD writer, and they all looked far more expensive than I thought they should be.
In the end I bought a generic bare bones PC, and filled all its slots by buying the cd, the network card, the scanner, etc, seperately.
I think if you were to do something similar you'd have the best of both worlds.
BTW I always get really annoyed when seeing adverts for "complete" PC's when it doesn't say how many slots/ports are going to be free..
> There is no single stereotype that fits everybody.
There could be any number of stereotypes that fit everybody... The problem is that stereotypes are just that, they are neither acurate nor meaningfull.
I have to say I don't much care what people describe me as, especially if they've never met me..
I took advantage of this to write a virus in Emacs lisp a while back - as a proof of concept thing.
Basically it would copy its code to ~/.virus append a line (enable-local-variables t) in your.emacs file, and then add a hook to enable it to spread when files were written.
>A lot depends on what you want out of your >relationship - we are not talking about >pretending to do/like/feel 'X' when you don't - >we are talking about *learning* to >do/like/feel 'X',
Thats fine, if its something that you would want to do/like/feel for yourself. What gets my goat is the suggestion that people should do this purely for the purposes of subterfuge.
> Mind you, if you are talking about 'pulling', > that's not really the same, is it - he/she is > probably doing exactly the same, if not >worse:+)
Actually I always find it vagualy distastfull when people suggest how somebody should change to attract a man/woman.
I'm not going to pretend to be something I'm not for anybody, and quite frankly even if I could I'd be feeling guilty the whole time knowing that I'd pulled under false pretenses..
(Hmm, advertisers can be sued if they sell products under false pretensions... Excuse me sir, you're under arrest - you don't really find nature appealing;)
Actually I was in Barcelona recently, and I got talking to some locals there who said that when it was showed over there the waiter Munwell(sp?) had changed nationality.
I'm not sure that this would work, mainly because of the perspective.
If you really wanted to cloak an object the image that you'd want projected on it would have to be the view-behind-the-object from the viewpoint of the observer.. And you can't have a camera where the viewer is...
(Of course even if you could you'd be screwed if two people stood in different places and both looked at the object - you'd want the object to be covered in two different types of background.)
I think there are several interesting points raised by this article, some of which have been mentioned, and some which haven't.
Basically, apart from the time it would take to write, the only downside I can see to this is the huge number of Perl modules that would be utterly broken.
Part of the attraction of using Perl for me is that I know whatever I'm doing there are going to be modules available to help me solve my problem.
Changing the implementation, and breaking these modules is going to be a huge loss from the whole Perl community - I've written Perl modules, and I've dabbled in embedding a Perl intepretter inside some of my programs, so I know how deeply you sometimes have to get inside Perl to work.
The obvious question is how much gain there would be if the code was re-written in C++, I know that a lot of the Perl code is an utter mess to follow, not the mention the "witty" comments like: /* And you'll never guess what the dog had */ /* in its mouth... */ in file "mg.c"
If the code was restructured in C++ it could be better, but I'm sure that it could be equally structured if the C code was smarted up.
Some OO(P) advocates tend to forget that its possible to program OO'dly with necessarily using an OO language. (Though granted it is a little harder, and some things are not as "nice").
As for the whole "C++ is too slow / inificcent" argument I think thats a no-brainer, Perl is never going to be the fastest language in the world if it remains intepretted, (I wonder how the Compiler Malcomn Beatty was working on is coming along), the implementation langauge should have little impact on the end-user.
Besides I don't imagine that many "advanced" features of C++ would be used if it was to be re-written. But the readability of the source code would go way up if there was a nice object structure, with a clear inheritence model.
As soon as the more people can understand the Perl code the maintainence suddenly becomes much easier.
(I wonder how many of the people who say that Perl is a write only language have seen the source... I'm sure they'd think much less of C if they had...)
Slashdot Mirror
Emacs
*grin*
Steve
---
Still without Lisp how would we customize our Emacs?
Steve
---
RCP is to FTP what SSH is to Telnet.
Steve
---
Basically the difference between telnet, and ssh is the way in which the characters are sent between your machine and the remote one.
With telnet each of your keypresses is send plain text, whereas SSH uses encryption which stops people from sniffing your connection.
If the remote machine runns SSHD, (the ssh server), then you really should be using SSH.
For a free SSH client for windows do a search on : http://www.gnusoftware.com.
Steve
---
I've used CURL a few times, for downloading from websites via https.
CURL is basically identical to wget, but with the advantage that it understands https.
For example it can be used by Gotmail to download mail from Hotmail - from the commandline.
SteveSteve
---
You could try looking at the following site:
http://www.gnu software.com/ilink/ilink.cgi?Category=E-mail%3ASen ding
StevePerl makes a great choice. 95% of the things I used to do in shell script, I now do in Perl instead (the exceptions mostly being system scripts where I'm espescially paranoid about security or stability).
If you're worried about writing a script which needs to be secured you should be writing it in Perl, rather than a shell language.
With Perls concept of taint'ed data you're probably more secure than with any Shell script you come up with..
SteveTheres a small typo in that, the corrected version should be:
$PROMPT="PERL> ";
Steveprint "$Prompt\n";
while ( <> )
{
eval;
print $@;
print "\n$PROMPT\n";
}
My biggest gripe about Mozilla is that the source to the latest milestone's hasn't been available anywhere.
If you go to the source download page the latested tagged version of the source is M13, no 14, and no 15...
Still apart from that its a good browser, thats only going to get better.
Steve
Ahh, those first nights when you powered her up.
Wondering if she'd crash if you bashed her keys too hard.
Trying to insert the floppy into the wrong opening, or back to front.
Isn't it amazing how much innuendo you get with nostalga?
*grin*
SteveGiven the rising popularity of Linux its only a matter of time untill the script kiddies start to use it in a serious way, this seems to be happening already, as lot of the remote DoS attacks against Windows are written for Linux/NetBSD.
Given that it seems like its just a matter of time untill the Linux virus becomes an interesting challenge to these users.
As for the defense that Unix virusses must be run as root to compromise a system - don't you believe it, this is just giving you a false sense of security.
There are many, many remote loopholes in well-known pieces of software that could potentially allow another internet worm-type virus to spread; especially against the new Linux users..
Steve
Why, isn't Emacs good enough for you?
Steve
Well, if you follow Douglas Adams, we're all part of a giant computer program to compute the answer the to meaning of life.
I guess that means we can add the Meaning of Life by Monty Python to this thread, and the entire Hitch-hikers guide to the universe collection as well
Steve
---
GNUSoftware.com - GNU Software for Windows Users.
When I went looking for a PC last time round I knew that I wanted something sexy, with lots of nice toys.
So I looked at some of the big combined packages, thinks like PC + scanner + printer + CD writer, and they all looked far more expensive than I thought they should be.
In the end I bought a generic bare bones PC, and filled all its slots by buying the cd, the network card, the scanner, etc, seperately.
I think if you were to do something similar you'd have the best of both worlds.
BTW I always get really annoyed when seeing adverts for "complete" PC's when it doesn't say how many slots/ports are going to be free..
Steve
---
http://GNUSoftware.com/ GNU Software for Windows Users.
There could be any number of stereotypes
that fit everybody
stereotypes are just that, they are neither acurate nor meaningfull.
I have to say I don't much care what people describe me as, especially if they've never met me..
Steve
---
http://GNUSoftware.com -- Educate Windows Users.
Still I think its something that more programming books should mention in bold in the
introduction - not tucked away in an appendix..
Steve
---
http://GNUSoftware.com/
Basically it would copy its code to ~/.virus append a line (enable-local-variables t) in your
When Emacs exited it would then remove ~/.virus.
Steve
---
>relationship - we are not talking about
>pretending to do/like/feel 'X' when you don't -
>we are talking about *learning* to
>do/like/feel 'X',
Thats fine, if its something that you would want to do/like/feel for yourself. What gets my goat is the suggestion that people should do this purely for the purposes of subterfuge.
> Mind you, if you are talking about 'pulling',
> that's not really the same, is it - he/she is
> probably doing exactly the same, if not >worse
Agreed
Steve
I'm not going to pretend to be something I'm not for anybody, and quite frankly even if I could I'd be feeling guilty the whole time knowing that I'd pulled under false pretenses..
(Hmm, advertisers can be sued if they sell products under false pretensions ... Excuse me sir, you're under arrest - you don't really find nature appealing ;)
Steve ---
--nodeps => No dependancy checking.
--force => Force the installation/removal.
I use Red Hat, after starting with Slackware,
but I still have to force RPM to install some packages, after its messed up..
Steve
I used to dream of a Beeb, all we had was a wind-up pocket calculator, with no keyboard, no display, and no elastic.
But it was a calculator to us
Mony python weekend and all
Steve
Actually I was in Barcelona recently, and I got talking to some locals there who said that when it was showed over there the waiter Munwell(sp?) had changed nationality.
In Spain he came from Mexico..
Steve
If you really wanted to cloak an object the image that you'd want projected on it would have to be the view-behind-the-object from the viewpoint of the observer.. And you can't have a camera where the viewer is...
(Of course even if you could you'd be screwed if two people stood in different places and both looked at the object - you'd want the object to be covered in two different types of background.)
Steve
I think there are several interesting points raised by this article, some of which have been mentioned, and some which haven't.
/* And you'll never guess what the dog had */
/* in its mouth... */ in file "mg.c"
... I'm sure they'd think much less of C if they had...)
Basically, apart from the time it would take to write, the only downside I can see to this is the huge number of Perl modules that would be utterly broken.
Part of the attraction of using Perl for me is that I know whatever I'm doing there are going to be modules available to help me solve my problem.
Changing the implementation, and breaking these modules is going to be a huge loss from the whole Perl community - I've written Perl modules, and I've dabbled in embedding a Perl intepretter inside some of my programs, so I know how deeply you sometimes have to get inside Perl to work.
The obvious question is how much gain there would be if the code was re-written in C++, I know that a lot of the Perl code is an utter mess to follow, not the mention the "witty" comments
like:
If the code was restructured in C++ it could be better, but I'm sure that it could be equally structured if the C code was smarted up.
Some OO(P) advocates tend to forget that its possible to program OO'dly with necessarily using an OO language. (Though granted it is a little harder, and some things are not as "nice").
As for the whole "C++ is too slow / inificcent"
argument I think thats a no-brainer, Perl is never going to be the fastest language in the world if it remains intepretted, (I wonder how the Compiler Malcomn Beatty was working on is coming along), the implementation langauge should have little impact on the end-user.
Besides I don't imagine that many "advanced"
features of C++ would be used if it was to be re-written. But the readability of the source code would go way up if there was a nice object structure, with a clear inheritence model.
As soon as the more people can understand the Perl code the maintainence suddenly becomes much easier.
(I wonder how many of the people who say that Perl is a write only language have seen the source
Steve