4 ms·
If you try to program just about anything non-trivial in sed(1), LUTs are the way to go.
by 082349872349872 3y ago
If you try to program just about anything non-trivial in sed(1), LUTs are the way to go.
- kragen 3y agoindeed! though you've had more success with that than i have i'd add: or fpgas, or eproms, or m6
- dredmorbius 3y agoI'm both fascinated and horrified to ask what non-trivial sed programming you might be doing, and why ;-)
- 082349872349872 3y agowhat: the most complicated thing (that I've actually used in other projects) was a data-driven precedence-climbing parser (which, since sed is usually lousy at dealing with place-value numerics, required sussing out sed-friendly representations of the core data types). why: because given a "weird machine" that is nearly omnipresent (in the back end, anyway) and is also a Perlis language, who among us would not wish to program it? (and who among us would willingly admit that 1959's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_1620#Model_I https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_1620#Model_I programmers had had better code-fu?) I must go down to the sed(1) again, to the pattern space and the hold, And all I ask is a t branch and a s/ub/st/ to map and fold; And the Jolt’s kick and the keys' clack and the write lines breaking, And a green glint in mirror shades, and a grey* dawn waking. * "the color of television, tuned to a dead channel"; no Ἠὼς Ῥοδοδάκτυλος here!