[TriLUG] The thin line...
mattfrye at gmail.com
Thu Sep 28 23:05:04 EDT 2006
On 9/28/06, Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale at gmail.com> wrote:
> I know that we've got members who consider themselves sysadmins, and
> others who consider themselves programmers.
I'm thinking about my last two or three jobs, so what follows is very
cross-industry and reflects a few different approaches. Among them,
health care (safer == more profit) and telecommunications (new
technology == more profit).
> 1) make (or less likely perhaps, ant or rake)
Just in patches that *we* created for specific customers on non-Linux
boxes. In Tekelec's Linux based products, RPM was used to similar
> 2) A configuration management/repository system like cvs or subversion.
> bash or your favorite shell : 10
> perl: 1, object oriented perl to be exact *shiver*
> python: 1, but usage is not yet widespread in any environment I'm used to
> ruby: 0
> php: 1 - several projects at Rex
> c(++): C - 1, C++: 0
> COBOL <G>: These days 0. The last time I wrote a piece of COBOL, I put in a tab. Good night, Irene.
In general, we used a specific set of tools for each job. In health
care, scripting languages du jour were discouraged to preserve
maintainability. That being said, I spent a fair amount of time
rewriting poorly designed ksh scripts whose intention was obscurity
for pride's sake. A bad scene, but I learned a lot about what *not*
By contrast, Tekelec decided (before my time there) to switch from
shell scripts to OO Perl for key product functionality. I have no
insight into this decision.
More information about the TriLUG