Multiple executables in path (Was: NON-SOURCE POSTINGS CONSIDERED HARMFUL!)

[Dan Bernstein]

In article <1991Jan21.171227.12138 at convex.com> tchrist at convex.COM (Tom Christiansen) writes:
> From the keyboard of brnstnd at kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein):
> :In article <1991Jan21.082717.22130 at convex.com> tchrist at convex.COM (Tom Christiansen) writes:
> :> The quotes you needed for your solution were gross and nigh
> :> unto illegible.
> :Illegible? It's not my fault if you haven't written enough shell code to
> :instantly recognize '\''. Or would you prefer double quoting?
> There's our Dan, who when he cannot win his point on technical merits,

Objective fact, which anyone who's been reading this discussion can
verify: After ``Or would you prefer double quoting?'' I presented
several technical points in answer to Tom's complaint.

Objective fact: Tom, who to me seems to be more interested in libel than
in rational discussion, failed to quote those points.

I wonder how often Tom perverts the discussion to prove his point?

> Maybe you wouldn't be
> posting so much drivel if you hadn't been kicked out of Princeton.  Would
> you care to tell us all about that incident, Dan?

That is an... interesting... accusation, which, in case anyone cares, I
flat-out deny. I'm perfectly willing to answer questions about my past
that aren't on the moral and intellectual level of ``Have you stopped
beating your wife?''

``So, Tom, maybe you wouldn't be posting so much drivel if you hadn't
been kicked out of Yale. Would you care to tell us all about that
incident, Tom?''

> What ever did happen to rec.games.rpg
> anyway?

The one time I proposed it, it didn't seem feasible, so I didn't call
for votes.

> Unportable: I think not.  In fact, perl runs on more machines than 
> sed and tr.

Objective fact: sed and tr have been ported to MS-DOS and the Mac.
Furthermore, they run on almost every BSD and System V machine. perl
doesn't even come close.

> I've not seen DOS or Macintosh ports of them, let alone
> of the shell-from-hell you like to post things in.

Objective fact: Tom just posted a statement (``perl runs on more
machines than sed and tr'') which is objectively false, and which, if he
had taken the time to check his facts, he would have known to be false.

I wonder how many of Tom's statements are like that.

> Unconventional:  That's what the Fortran programmer said when he
> first saw Algol, Pascal, C, etc.

Fair enough.

> Ungodly:  Oh, now *there's* an effective criticism for you.  I'm sure
> the whole net will rise up in popular accord for this one.  With gods
> on your side, who can stand against you?  

``Gross: Oh, now *there's* an effective criticism for you. I'm sure the
whole net will rise up in popular accord for this one. With un-grossness
on your side, who can stand against you?''

---Dan