|
My mother used to make Brawn[^] from time to time, so you'd open the fridge to get milk for coffee, and there'd be a pigs head staring at you ...
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Fridge? Ha! If we wanted something kept cool, it was put on the kitchen outside windowsill. (During the summer, we didn't buy stuff that needed to be kept cool; milk was delivered in the morning and was warm by lunchtime.) We did have a fridge, but it didn't work so we just used it as a cupboard. So: "a fridge? You were lucky; there were a hundred and sixty of us living in a small shoebox in the middle of the road."
|
|
|
|
|
And I bet when your father came home from work he killed you all and danced on your grave.
|
|
|
|
|
I knew this thread was going to go the way of the Four Yorkshiremen!
|
|
|
|
|
The old ones are the best. But I think it should be re-titled "the four binary persons without va***as who live in the county of England best known for plain speech".
|
|
|
|
|
(Well actually he never did come home; that was the cause of the lack of working fridge, and many other "hardships" that never seemed to cause any lasting harm.)
|
|
|
|
|
The first image reminds me of the interesting and useless piece of information that less time separates us from Tyrannosaurus Rex than separated Tyrannosaurus Rex from Stegosaurus.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
Peer heard self implicating (3)
|
|
|
|
|
icannottellaliefatheritwasme.
|
|
|
|
|
|
yep
|
|
|
|
|
It seems so useful, i just can't stand the syntax. I couldn't even tell you why except I can't get my head around it. Just give me C# or something with a Shell object.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
I have the same problem. I don’t know if it’s the pipeline, the “you can do it like this or that”, or the feeling like stuff is barely bolted together. It just feels off.
Making things worse, a significant part of my current job depends on it.
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
same here, I keep trying to learn it but it just doesn't seem to sink in properly. I did manage to create a small script recently when moving from VS2017 to VS2019, which upgraded all my C++ projects, and tidied up the rest. If only I could expand on what I learned.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Powershell is very useful. It is a major tool in our shop. Mostly used for pipeline processes and deployments, etc.
I think the general consensus for most people is that you get better at PS, but you don't ever "like" it.
|
|
|
|
|
Reminds me of modems, time-sharing, teletype terminals and thermal printers.
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
|
|
|
|
|
LOL, almost everything i code that's executable is a console app
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
I wish I could properly spell Powersjell!
"If we don't change direction, we'll end up where we're going"
|
|
|
|
|
I dare to claim, it's a simple matter of getting used to.
You can use .NET objects from PS though. I did this a while ago until MS coughed up Extract-Archive to unzip stuff via System.IO.Compression in a PS script. Not exactly C#, but you still have to learn less new stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
The syntax is kind of kludgy which makes it harder to learn and remember. It suffers from grammatical inconsistencies, kind of like SQL does.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, it's the exact opposite of cludgy. All commands follow the same pattern: verb-noun. The parameters all follow the same pattern: -parameter (with maybe additional switches). It really looks like it's a matter of getting used to for you. PS' syntax is pretty different from CMD's syntax, bash's syntax, C#'s syntax, Delphi's syntax (I'm starting to run out of syntaxes I'm really used to here).
PS is, in fact, absolutely self-consistent though.
|
|
|
|
|
It's a little like a French car - internally consistent and makes sense if you've never seen another car. Confusingly different for no apparent reason if you compare it to almost anything else. It's almost as if the design criteria was to make it different from everything else.
I spent ages doing the same automation in Python because it was easier and more functional, until I got a job where the locked down environment forced me to use Powershell.
Now I'm nervous about a tool that's installed by default, and which anyone could use.
|
|
|
|
|
I disagree with "never seen another car". You're still claiming it's objectively worse. The thing is, I know exactly how you feel! Heck, my muscle memory makes me sometimes work faster when I shell down to CMD and do something there. I know how you feel!
It's just that PS isn't objectively worse, like your french car. It's very different, but it's cool. By now, it's clear that you haven't attempted giving PS a chance. You haven't built complex pipes in Bash & PS (well, you may have in Bash but you surely haven't in PS). You haven't tried reading complex PS scripts.
All that different stuff serves a purpose, it helps getting things done! It's not only internally consistent, it's very logical once you give it a chance. Which you don't.
Speaking of which, why aren't you worried about CMD? It's installed by default, anyone can use it and you sure as hell can, with some effort, do really complex stuff there. Why aren't you worried about VBS? It's ability to call C-like APIs is limited (read: non-existant), but a heap ton of Windows is accessible through COM thus through VBS (well, technically, a COM-object isn't VBS-callable by default, it needs to support IDispatch while COM only requires IUnknown, but MS are pretty good at supporting administration through VBS). Speaking of administration, WMI is installed by default as well.
But it's only PS that worries you. Of course.
PS: at the beginning of this discussion, C# was mentioned. Now it's Python. The thing is, C# is, syntactically, way more similar to PS than it is to Python. This isn't an objective discussion, isn't it?
|
|
|
|
|
Of course. You are entitled to your opinion. That you surmised so much about my previous programming experiences, and leapt to the conclusion I wasn't worried about alternative technologies. . .
Kiriander wrote: This isn't an objective discussion, isn't it?
You said it yourself. . . or did you, since it is a double negative.
|
|
|
|