Hacker News Reader

Comment by petdance | Hacker News Reader

> I think the point everyone is trying to make here is. Should every person spend 5-10 minutes doing this?

Exactly. People tell me "Nobody needs ack, you just write wrappers around find+grep" and I say "You could, but I published it and now people don't have to."

View on HN

This reminds me of the first of Larry Wall's three virtues:

"[Laziness] makes you write labor-saving programs that other people will find useful, and document what you wrote so you don't have to answer so many questions about it. Hence, the first great virtue of a programmer."

I use ack, but that's because it searches for the right file types, ignores source control directories automatically, and has pretty colors, not because it's find+grep.

Other than "pretty colors", your statement contradicts itself. Doing the things you mentioned is being find+grep. That's the entire point of ack, to be find+grep.

I didn't say that find couldn't ignore source control directories or find only specific file types. However, ack does that far better as it has a better semantic awareness of both concepts.

I don't have to worry about updating my find command lines to account for new types of source code or source control folders in unfamiliar programs, I need only ensure that ack is kept up-to-date.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Your post contradicted itself. You literally said "I don't use ack because it is find+grep, I use it because it is find+grep". I am simply pointing this out.

Except by that logic, you could say that any user of a high-level language was really claiming (in the end) to be using assembly.

C++ once compiled to C, but even then people wouldn't claim they were using C, they'd claim they were using C++. "I don't use C++ because it's C with 'classes', I use C++ because it sets up my vtables and overloaded functions"

That analogy makes absolutely no sense. You are claiming an intended use. And then contradicting yourself by saying you don't use it for that intended use. The analogy would be "I don't use C++ to write programs, I use C++ to write words that have a particular syntax that a C++ compiler can understand and translate into executable machine code". And that statement is just as contradictory as the one you made.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com