nemesis wrote:

> ah, the guy who enjoys a programming language comprised of obfuscated symbols in
> confusing point-free style

I disagree.

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> I was thinking more along the lines of
>>>
>>>   FOR /R %f IN (*) DO echo %f
>> 
>> Yes. But the right answer is "both, depending on what options you give."
> 
> Probably, yes. (I already figured out - for another problem - that %~nf
> strips the file extension.) Personally, I'm not fond of all these funky
> abbriviations. I'd refer something like %{drop suffix %f} or something.

You've clearly never used Perl?

Post a reply to this message

>> Probably, yes. (I already figured out - for another problem - that %~nf
>> strips the file extension.) Personally, I'm not fond of all these funky
>> abbriviations. I'd refer something like %{drop suffix %f} or something.
> 
> You've clearly never used Perl?

It's something I try to avoid, yes.

(I sat down with a book one day and wrote a Perl CGI script. A week 
later, I couldn't figure out how in the name of God it actually works...)

Post a reply to this message