it seems awk is alive and well 
Author Message
 it seems awk is alive and well

When I left computers in 1992 it seemed that Perl was getting big.
Coming back in 2000, it seems awk is alive and well.  Apparently I
don't need to learn a new language then, and can also be confident that
[g]awk programs I write can be run by my MS Windows friends too?

Too feel more comfortable about not wanting to learn new things are
there any more comparison docs than just this snippit I found:
     AWK is a language similar to PERL, only considerably more elegant.
     Arnold Robbins

     Hey!
     Larry Wall
[I will check the awk faq next time i connect.]
--
http://www.*-*-*.com/ :restore .com.



Wed, 10 Dec 2003 07:23:47 GMT  
 it seems awk is alive and well

Dan> Too feel more comfortable about not wanting to learn new things are
Dan> there any more comparison docs than just this snippit I found:
Dan>      AWK is a language similar to PERL, only considerably more elegant.
Dan>      Arnold Robbins

Dan>      Hey!
Dan>      Larry Wall

Do not 'dis' Perl here, and I won't 'dis' awk.

:-)

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095

Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!



Sat, 13 Dec 2003 09:06:14 GMT  
 it seems awk is alive and well
<flame type="wok" intensity="mild">
I'm a natural born awker, but (hate to say it) if you're
going to do your regex based text processing over TCP/IP and
with graphs -- awk's performance is pretty lousy. For other
(so-called "normal") tasks is often more than enough...

OTOH I like perl, too ;) It's still better than Java (and
COBOL ;>
</flame>
--

Written at:
 . . . .
 # . . #
 . . # .
 # # . .



Sat, 13 Dec 2003 15:46:51 GMT  
 it seems awk is alive and well


Quote:
><flame type="wok" intensity="mild">
>I'm a natural born awker, but (hate to say it) if you're
>going to do your regex based text processing over TCP/IP and
>with graphs -- awk's performance is pretty lousy. For other
>(so-called "normal") tasks is often more than enough...

        Having not yet had a chance to try gawk 3.1.0's TCP/IP
        capability, I was wondering if one should infer that it
        is slow? Or is it hard to use?

Erik
--
 ----
 The wonderful thing about standards is that there are so many of them.
 -- Andy Tannenbaum



Sat, 13 Dec 2003 16:18:01 GMT  
 it seems awk is alive and well

Quote:

> >going to do your regex based text processing over TCP/IP and
> >with graphs -- awk's performance is pretty lousy. For other
> >(so-called "normal") tasks is often more than enough...

>    Having not yet had a chance to try gawk 3.1.0's TCP/IP

*GRIN* You know word "ironic"?
BTW - I tried pre-3.1 patch for gawk (bidirectional pipes AFAIR).

Quote:
>    capability, I was wondering if one should infer that it
>    is slow? Or is it hard to use?

Haha! GOTCHA! I didn't use words like 'slow' or 'hard to
use', man!

If you want something 'hard-to-use' try Snobol4 (or JCL).

BTW: Have you ever used 'original-awk' (bwk's site), or mawk?

"awk which has TCP/IP isn't a true awk"

--

Written at:
 # . . .
 . . . .
 . . # .
 . . . #



Sat, 13 Dec 2003 16:48:27 GMT  
 it seems awk is alive and well


Quote:

>> >going to do your regex based text processing over TCP/IP and
>> >with graphs -- awk's performance is pretty lousy. For other
>> >(so-called "normal") tasks is often more than enough...

>>        Having not yet had a chance to try gawk 3.1.0's TCP/IP

>*GRIN* You know word "ironic"?
>BTW - I tried pre-3.1 patch for gawk (bidirectional pipes AFAIR).

>>        capability, I was wondering if one should infer that it
>>        is slow? Or is it hard to use?

>Haha! GOTCHA! I didn't use words like 'slow' or 'hard to
>use', man!

>If you want something 'hard-to-use' try Snobol4 (or JCL).

>BTW: Have you ever used 'original-awk' (bwk's site), or mawk?

>"awk which has TCP/IP isn't a true awk"

        I'm not sure how close to the original the awk on HP-UX 7 and SunOS
        boxes from 1985 were, but when nawk came out I really appreciated the
        improved diagnostics.

        Harboring a not-so-small wish that awk could in time provide sufficient shell
        command replacement to avoid the need to alternate shell and awk in my
        scripts, I'm thrilled to see not only the TCP/IP access, but also the
        extension facility.

        In general, there is strength in diversity. An alternative to the
        write-only language should not be sufficient threat to its popularity to
        provoke too much outrage, one hopes.

Erik
--
 ----
 The wonderful thing about standards is that there are so many of them.
 -- Andy Tannenbaum



Sun, 14 Dec 2003 16:14:19 GMT  
 it seems awk is alive and well
Hi Dan,

AWK, or in my case GNU's AWK named GAWK, is pretty alive and very well I've had
the pleasure to experience. I'm new to AWK so please bear with me, but I love it
already so much.
The new GAWK version 3.1.0 which has been released just some weeks ago I like
especially because it finally provides binary operations like "and", "or", etc.,
and other new smart functions.

UNIX I appreciate, however I've to earn money on the Windows platform. I'm very
happy some nice people compile and pack GAWK for Windows - even the newest
version. So I can happily run the platform independant GAWK and still let it run
on my colleagues' Windows boxes. They usually wonder what a powerful and
"unknown" tool AWK is. Well, the typical Windows developer, let alone user,
doesn't know AWK and other smart tools, coming from the UNIX world, at all. But
they like the results of those small, smart and efficient AWK programs. :-)

All the best.
MfG, Dave

Most GNU tools ready for Win: http://unxutils.sourceforge.net
New versions of some of them: http://gnuwin32.sourceforge.net

--
__________________________________________________________
News suchen, lesen, schreiben mit http://newsgroups.web.de



Wed, 17 Dec 2003 17:35:38 GMT  
 
 [ 7 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. please try BRL Cabaret -- performance seems better today

2. Better awk-mode

3. Better AWK

4. Is it better perl than awk ?

5. Is awk a better tool for this task?

6. I am not deaf, but am I mute?

7. common mistakes in awk: comparing awk with C

8. Awk compilers / Awk to C converters

9. Arrays in awk/awk help please!

10. Help with Awk, totally new to AWK programing

11. awk process in awk ??

12. AWK newbie is looking for a AWK help with his 1st program

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software