[10919] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 4520 Volume: 8
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Wed Dec 30 15:07:29 1998
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 98 12:01:34 -0800
From: Perl-Users Digest <Perl-Users-Request@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU>
To: Perl-Users@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Perl-Users Digest Wed, 30 Dec 1998 Volume: 8 Number: 4520
Today's topics:
Re: Retrospective on comp.lang.perl.moderated? <dgris@moiraine.dimensional.com>
Re: Retrospective on comp.lang.perl.moderated? (John Stanley)
Re: Retrospective on comp.lang.perl.moderated? <dgris@moiraine.dimensional.com>
Re: Retrospective on comp.lang.perl.moderated? (John Stanley)
Re: Retrospective on comp.lang.perl.moderated? (John Stanley)
Re: Scale/Mode calculator <simon_smith@lineone.net>
Re: Syntax error in subroutine: help please <jdf@pobox.com>
Re: Syntax error in subroutine: help please <tkd@inr.net>
Re: Syntax error in subroutine: help please (Clay Irving)
Re: tutorial websites (Clay Irving)
Re: tutorial websites <gellyfish@btinternet.com>
Special: Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 12 Dec 98 (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 30 Dec 1998 10:14:54 -0700
From: Daniel Grisinger <dgris@moiraine.dimensional.com>
Subject: Re: Retrospective on comp.lang.perl.moderated?
Message-Id: <m3hfudk0vl.fsf@moiraine.dimensional.com>
tadmc@metronet.com (Tad McClellan) writes:
> You miss the point of registration.
>
> Its point is to eliminate spam and FAQs.
Perhaps I am misremembering the debate that lead to clp.moderated,
but I thought that the registration was to allow posters to
use silly, ineffective, munged addresses in a pathetic attempt
to avoid spam.
dgris
--
Daniel Grisinger dgris@moiraine.dimensional.com
perl -Mre=eval -e'$_=shift;;@[=split//;;$,=qq;\n;;;print
m;(.{$-}(?{$-++}));,q;;while$-<=@[;;' 'Just Another Perl Hacker'
------------------------------
Date: 30 Dec 1998 19:09:53 GMT
From: stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Subject: Re: Retrospective on comp.lang.perl.moderated?
Message-Id: <76dtq1$22j$1@news.NERO.NET>
In article <1dktfwl.1jx9aol1mzemdkN@bos-ip-1-101.ziplink.net>,
Ronald J Kimball <rjk@linguist.dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>Leslie Mikesell <les@MCS.COM> wrote:
>> >Well, I guess that's your problem. Registering for
>> >comp.lang.perl.moderated is no more difficult than signing up for an
>> >electronic mailing list.
That is not true. Signing up for most mailing lists requires just one
piece of email. The first posting to .moderated requires posting a news
article AND sending email.
>> I know who I am. Why should I attempt to prove it to someone else
>> using an unreliable medium just so I could answer someone else's
>> question?
>
>So that every poster will read the about the many resources available
>(documentation/FAQ, other appropriate newsgroups, etc.) *before* having
>a message posted to the newsgroup.
This is an erronious argument. Forcing Leslie to prove that his email
address is valid once (which is all that the registration accomplishes)
does not force anyone else to read the FAQs. It did not force me to read
the FAQs or any other Perl documents, neither when Leslie was asked to
register, nor when I registered.
>By the way, you can still answer someone else's question just by
>emailing them directly. If that's not too much of a "bother" for you.
I guess the purpose for newsgroups has been lost.
>Sadly, the perl debugger will not help you find the bug up your ass.
A fine, helpful sentiment.
------------------------------
Date: 30 Dec 1998 12:22:40 -0700
From: Daniel Grisinger <dgris@moiraine.dimensional.com>
Subject: Re: Retrospective on comp.lang.perl.moderated?
Message-Id: <m367atl9j3.fsf@moiraine.dimensional.com>
stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley) writes:
> That is not true. Signing up for most mailing lists requires just one
> piece of email. The first posting to .moderated requires posting a news
> article AND sending email.
How many mailing lists have you subscribed to recently? Most lists
now require two separate e-mails to join, with only a limited window
of time in which the second e-mail will be considered valid. It
certainly isn't any harder to make one's first posting to clpmod
than it is to join most lists.
> This is an erronious argument. Forcing Leslie to prove that his email
> address is valid once (which is all that the registration accomplishes)
> does not force anyone else to read the FAQs. It did not force me to read
> the FAQs or any other Perl documents, neither when Leslie was asked to
> register, nor when I registered.
No, but if you'll recall, this was the only compromise that could be
reached between people who put valid information in their headers and
those who think it's acceptable to break my software and make my life
harder. I think the real target of people's dissatisfaction should be
the brain donors who think that address munging accomplishes something.
That said, it is inaccurate to portray the registration as a mechanism
to induce people to read documentation. Registration is simply a way
to work around the idiocy that some display.
dgris
--
Daniel Grisinger dgris@moiraine.dimensional.com
perl -Mre=eval -e'$_=shift;;@[=split//;;$,=qq;\n;;;print
m;(.{$-}(?{$-++}));,q;;while$-<=@[;;' 'Just Another Perl Hacker'
------------------------------
Date: 30 Dec 1998 19:25:42 GMT
From: stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Subject: Re: Retrospective on comp.lang.perl.moderated?
Message-Id: <76dunm$2d5$1@news.NERO.NET>
In article <89fd67.lu4.ln@magna.metronet.com>,
Tad McClellan <tadmc@metronet.com> wrote:
>: Hmmm, one would think that if the moderator-approved question wasn't
>: something from the FAQ, then the answer I tried to post probably
>: wasn't either.
>
> If followups were auto-passed without requiring registration,
Ummm, I thought the moderators processed articles by hand. That's what I
remember someone else here saying in response to Leslie's comment about
automated rejection. What we were told is that the registration just got
you past the input filter, and then your articles were passed on to the
moderators. What is this "auto-passed" you are referring to?
> The reason for creating the newsgroup was to eliminate such postings.
Yes, that's the moderator's job. When he sees it is a FAQ or spam, he
rejects it, no matter if the poster is registered or not.
> You miss the point of registration.
>
> Its point is to eliminate spam and FAQs.
No, the point of MODERATION is to eliminate spam and FAQs. There are
hundreds, if not thousands, of moderated groups who chose that method,
and none of them needed to register authorized posters.
The point of registration was to try to prevent people who munge their
email addresses from "forcing" the people who want to reply by email to
everything they read to spend time replying just to get a bounce. This
failed on two counts: there was enough opposition to the basic premise
that a method of using munged addresses was adopted (although you must
beg one of the moderators to tell you what it is), and it doesn't
guarantee that email won't bounce anyway.
The point of registering cannot be to prevent FAQs and spam, because
spammers can register just like anyone else, and anyone who is
registered can still ask a FAQ.
> We might replace it with your superior method if we knew what
> it was...
It's called "moderation".
------------------------------
Date: 30 Dec 1998 19:46:15 GMT
From: stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Subject: Re: Retrospective on comp.lang.perl.moderated?
Message-Id: <76dvu7$33u$1@news.NERO.NET>
In article <m367atl9j3.fsf@moiraine.dimensional.com>,
Daniel Grisinger <dgris@moiraine.dimensional.com> wrote:
>stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley) writes:
>
>> That is not true. Signing up for most mailing lists requires just one
>> piece of email. The first posting to .moderated requires posting a news
>> article AND sending email.
>
>How many mailing lists have you subscribed to recently?
I'm sorry, I don't keep count. More than 5. Less than 20.
>Most lists
>now require two separate e-mails to join, with only a limited window
>of time in which the second e-mail will be considered valid.
None of the lists I subscribed to did this. None of the lists from
which I receive spam (e.g. realmedia) does this. 0 out of 5 does not
support your claim of "most".
>It
>certainly isn't any harder to make one's first posting to clpmod
>than it is to join most lists.
Since most lists require just one email, yes, I'm sorry, it is harder to
make the first posting to .moderated. "post+mail" is harder than "mail",
even if the difficulty of either part is small. Perhaps you would
recognize it in math terms? (.0001 + .0001) > .0001 Will you believe
this statement or do I need to provide a perl script that proves it?
>No, but if you'll recall, this was the only compromise that could be
>reached between people who put valid information in their headers and
>those who think it's acceptable to break my software and make my life
>harder.
No, if you recall, the demand that people register came long before any
method of registering a munged address was proposed. Registering was not
proposed as a method of allowing people to use munged addresses, it was
proposed as a way of preventing them from doing it. In case YOU don't
recall, I was one of the vocal opponents to registering for precisely
this reason.
As for your ridiculous comment implying that people who munge their
addresses are "breaking your software" or "mak[ing] your life harder",
poppycock. They do neither. You are unable to reply to this posting by
mail, but your life is certainly not harder than if you could. If your
software breaks because of the address in my article, you need new
software. But then, you've been told this before and hearing it again
won't make any difference.
>I think the real target of people's dissatisfaction should be
>the brain donors who think that address munging accomplishes something.
I think the "brain donors" are those who refuse to admit that for those
who use it, it works. If you don't use it, you cannot be in a position
to say it doesn't work. I can tell you the amount of spam I get from
people who scan USENET for addresses. 0. Not from their lack of trying,
but from lack of success in delivery. It works.
>That said, it is inaccurate to portray the registration as a mechanism
>to induce people to read documentation.
I said that. You are arguing with me for precisely what reason?
>Registration is simply a way to work around the idiocy that some display.
I agree, although the group who displays the idiocy is probably not the
same as the one you think you mean.
I'll point out, probably ineffectively, that you chose to word your
argument in terms of "brain donors" and "idiocy". If you have a
complaint about the tone the discussion is taking, look in the mirror.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 14:54:10 +0000
From: Simon Smith <simon_smith@lineone.net>
Subject: Re: Scale/Mode calculator
Message-Id: <ant3014100b05GBM@simon_smith.lineone.net>
In article <2mNi+PAD5hi2Iwcc@lansdown.demon.co.uk>, Samuel Hogarth
<URL:mailto:samuel@lansup.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Check out a piece by Rachmaninov that starts in G# minor for solo
> piano - unfortunately I can't remember the title but someone else may
> do. It is full of double accidentals.
It's the imaginitively titled "Prelude (in G# minor)" (Op. 32 No. 11)
- and a pretty fine piece it is too :-)
Simon
--
* * * Visit my Rachmaninov website! * * *
http://website.lineone.net/~simon_smith/ * * *
* * * e-mail - simon_smith@lineone.net
* * * ICQ UIN - 17019720 * * *
------------------------------
Date: 30 Dec 1998 18:21:25 +0100
From: Jonathan Feinberg <jdf@pobox.com>
To: "Dave Martina" <tkd@inr.net>
Subject: Re: Syntax error in subroutine: help please
Message-Id: <m3lnjpfsve.fsf@joshua.panix.com>
"Dave Martina" <tkd@inr.net> writes:
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Syntax error at <path> line 39 near "rename"
> Execution aborted due to compilation errors
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Are you possibly missing a semicolon on the preceding line?
> The code is attached:
>
>
> begin 666 code.txt
> M<W5B(&EN:71?=V]R9',@>PT*"7=H:6QE("AD969I;F5D("@D9FEL96YA;64@
Please don't encode your program listings; just paste them in. They
should be brief enough that compression is unnecessary.
--
Jonathan Feinberg jdf@pobox.com Sunny Brooklyn, NY
http://pobox.com/~jdf
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 13:35:41 -0500
From: "Dave Martina" <tkd@inr.net>
Subject: Re: Syntax error in subroutine: help please
Message-Id: <4kui2.2188$B46.3536882@newshog.newsread.com>
Thanks to all who helped . . . problem solved.
and I will refrain from encoding further program listings :)
dave
------------------------------
Date: 30 Dec 1998 13:28:50 -0500
From: clay@panix.com (Clay Irving)
Subject: Re: Syntax error in subroutine: help please
Message-Id: <76drd2$18c@panix.com>
In <iZri2.2141$B46.3441694@newshog.newsread.com> "Dave Martina" <tkd@inr.net> writes:
>NEWBIE QUESTION!
[...]
>The error I get when I try to execute is:
>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>Syntax error at <path> line 39 near "rename"
>Execution aborted due to compilation errors
>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>TIA to anyone who can help me find the error
>The code is attached:
>begin 666 code.txt
>M<W5B(&EN:71?=V]R9',@>PT*"7=H:6QE("AD969I;F5D("@D9FEL96YA;64@
>M/2!G;&]B*"(J+G-E8R(I*2 I('L-"@EO<&5N("A73U)$4TQ)4U0L)&9I;&5N
>M86UE*2!\? T*"0ED:64@(D-A;B=T(&]P96X@)&9I;&5N86UE.B D(2([#0H)
>M:68@*"U-(%=/4D133$E35" \/2 W+C I('LC(&-O;7!L>2!W:71H('!O;&EC
>M>2!F;W(@-R!D87ES(&%G:6YG#0H)=VAI;&4@*&1E9FEN960@*"1N86UE(#T@
>M/%=/4D133$E35#XI*2![#0H)8VAO;7 @*"1N86UE*3L-"@DD=V]R9" ](#Q7
>M3U)$4TQ)4U0^.PT*"6-H;VUP("@D=V]R9"D[#0H))'=O<F1S>R1N86UE?3TD
>M=V]R9#L-"B @(" @?0T*(" @("!C;&]S92 H5T]21%-,25-4*2!\? T*(" @
>M(" )9&EE(")C;V]U;&1N)W0@8VQO<V4@)&9I;&5N86UE.B D(2([#0I]#0H)
>M96QS92![#0H)"2,@;75S="!C;&]S92!F:6QE(&)E9F]R92!R96YA;6EN9R!I
>M= T*"0EC;&]S92 H5T]21%-,25-4*2!\? T*"0D)9&EE(")C86XG="!C;&]S
>M92 D9FEL96YA;64N;VQD.B D(2(-"@D)<F5N86UE("@D9FEL96YA;64L("(D
>M9FEL96YA;64N;VQD(BD@?'P-"@D)"61I92 B8V%N)W0@<F5N86UE("1F:6QE
>6;F%M93H@)"$B.PT*"0E]#0H)?0T*?0``
>`
>end
I think your error is this line:
M:68@*"U-(%=/4D133$E35" \/2 W+C I('LC(&-O;7!L>2!W:71H('!O;&EC
Please post your code in text.
--
Clay Irving
clay@panix.com
------------------------------
Date: 30 Dec 1998 13:31:29 -0500
From: clay@panix.com (Clay Irving)
Subject: Re: tutorial websites
Message-Id: <76dri1$1rl@panix.com>
In <76dint$si9$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> uunews@hotmail.com writes:
> I am looking for useful websites and mail servers on PERL. Any help is
>appreciated.
Are you looking for tutorials or useful Web sites?
It the format, try the tutorial section of Perl Reference:
http://reference.perl.com/query.cgi?tutorials
If the later, start at http://www.perl.com and have fun.
--
Clay Irving
clay@panix.com
------------------------------
Date: 30 Dec 1998 19:50:38 -0000
From: Jonathan Stowe <gellyfish@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: tutorial websites
Message-Id: <76e06e$f0$1@gellyfish.btinternet.com>
On Wed, 30 Dec 1998 16:01:02 GMT uunews@hotmail.com wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> I am looking for useful websites and mail servers on PERL. Any help is
> appreciated.
>
It kind off surprises me that you found this newsgroup without first hitting
on some of this information but there you go.
A good start will always be:
<URL:http://www.perl.com>
/J\
--
Jonathan Stowe <jns@btinternet.com>
Some of your questions answered:
<URL:http://www.btinternet.com/~gellyfish/resources/wwwfaq.htm>
Hastings: <URL:http://www.newhoo.com/Regional/UK/England/East_Sussex/Hastings>
------------------------------
Date: 12 Dec 98 21:33:47 GMT (Last modified)
From: Perl-Request@ruby.oce.orst.edu (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
Subject: Special: Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 12 Dec 98)
Message-Id: <null>
Administrivia:
Well, after 6 months, here's the answer to the quiz: what do we do about
comp.lang.perl.moderated. Answer: nothing.
]From: Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu>
]Date: 21 Sep 1998 19:53:43 -0700
]Subject: comp.lang.perl.moderated available via e-mail
]
]It is possible to subscribe to comp.lang.perl.moderated as a mailing list.
]To do so, send mail to majordomo@eyrie.org with "subscribe clpm" in the
]body. Majordomo will then send you instructions on how to confirm your
]subscription. This is provided as a general service for those people who
]cannot receive the newsgroup for whatever reason or who just prefer to
]receive messages via e-mail.
The Perl-Users Digest is a retransmission of the USENET newsgroup
comp.lang.perl.misc. For subscription or unsubscription requests, send
the single line:
subscribe perl-users
or:
unsubscribe perl-users
to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu.
To submit articles to comp.lang.perl.misc (and this Digest), send your
article to perl-users@ruby.oce.orst.edu.
To submit articles to comp.lang.perl.announce, send your article to
clpa@perl.com.
To request back copies (available for a week or so), send your request
to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu with the command "send perl-users x.y",
where x is the volume number and y is the issue number.
The Meta-FAQ, an article containing information about the FAQ, is
available by requesting "send perl-users meta-faq". The real FAQ, as it
appeared last in the newsgroup, can be retrieved with the request "send
perl-users FAQ". Due to their sizes, neither the Meta-FAQ nor the FAQ
are included in the digest.
The "mini-FAQ", which is an updated version of the Meta-FAQ, is
available by requesting "send perl-users mini-faq". It appears twice
weekly in the group, but is not distributed in the digest.
For other requests pertaining to the digest, send mail to
perl-users-request@ruby.oce.orst.edu. Do not waste your time or mine
sending perl questions to the -request address, I don't have time to
answer them even if I did know the answer.
------------------------------
End of Perl-Users Digest V8 Issue 4520
**************************************
