http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=947367


in reply to Re: RFC iEngine
in thread RFC iEngine

OK, name me something that is along the lines that I am suggesting.

And as for your comments on the codename I am using, it is a joke as I wont decide on a name until I have a working system.

You guys who always seem to pop up with so-called witty remarks never really make any valid point other than 'it has been done' but never manage to produce an example.

Please indulge me, provide something that does just what I am suggesting otherwise why bother.

Andrew

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: RFC iEngine
by Anonymous Monk on Jan 12, 2012 at 03:54 UTC

    OK, name me something that is along the lines that I am suggesting.

    You mean something other than: pick any operating system, any bash, any templating system ( from anywhere or cpan ttree / Template::Tutorial::Web ), and go ?

    Sure, here you go, http://mojolicious.org/

    :) Is that sufficiently witty?

    I can't really point to something already existing because so far , the only distinguishing feature has been, an interactive shell, with one command per line -- already available on every single computer platform

    Sure, creating templates on the command line, is not very context sensitive in the way you describe, but then its less verbose than your proposed context sensitive alternative

    Actually, what you're suggesting sounds more and more line a gVim Shell plugin, except without the editor features of gVim -- Oh great, we're back to bash and them :)

    Oh, but you say the problem, you don't want to bolt a bunch of binaries on top of each other, you want to create an operating system --- no thank, iNoLike iPointless iBusyWork

    It actually sounds like you might be satisfied with webkit kitsh / PhantomJS -- can't say I'd use either to create content

[reply]

      OK, the three examples you have provided may loosely do the same as I am suggesting, but they are essentially a programming language.

      However, HAML, which jdrago999 kindly mentioned - without the rude attitude you have - is much closer to what I am talking about. But then, it is still a little verbose as you say. In fact my proposal is to remove the verbosity and make methods that are easier to create, build, store and maintain your content.

      Stop trying to be clever mate and maybe grow up and contribute rather than act like a clown.

      Andrew
[reply]
[reply]

        However, HAML, which jdrago999 kindly mentioned - without the rude attitude you have - is much closer to what I am talking about.

        Oh fuck you

        In fact my proposal is to remove the verbosity and make methods that are easier to create, build, store and maintain your content.

        How very specific

        Stop trying to be clever mate and maybe grow up and contribute rather than act like a clown.

        Oh fuck you

[reply]
Re^3: RFC iEngine
by marto (Cardinal) on Jan 11, 2012 at 17:26 UTC

    You guys who always seem to pop up with so-called witty remarks never really make any valid point other than 'it has been done' but never manage to produce an example.

    That's quiet a bold generalization, care to provide some examples of this behavior you claim "always" occurs?

[reply]

      You don't get the point I am trying to make here either. The generic term 'witty' is what I am referring to. You only have to look at this 'anonymous' monk's remarks regarding the name alone, of which ain't that relevant to the whole topic.

      There again, you do not seem to provide a 'genuine' example either, that it is claimed that my idea is 'done', or rather in other words, re-inventing the wheel.

      Andrew
[reply]
        You are doing a crappy job of explaining the points you claim to be making. You are doing a great job at not providing examples when someone calls you on something.
[reply]

In Section Meditations