[25042] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 7292 Volume: 10
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Sat Oct 23 21:05:47 2004
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 18:05:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: Perl-Users Digest <Perl-Users-Request@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU>
To: Perl-Users@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Perl-Users Digest Sat, 23 Oct 2004 Volume: 10 Number: 7292
Today's topics:
Re: list vs array <nospam@nospam.com>
Re: list vs array <nospam@nospam.com>
Re: list vs array <jurgenex@hotmail.com>
Re: list vs array <sbryce@scottbryce.com>
Re: list vs array <nospam@nospam.com>
Re: list vs array <nospam@nospam.com>
Re: list vs array <usa1@llenroc.ude.invalid>
Re: list vs array <sbryce@scottbryce.com>
Re: list vs array <nospam@nospam.com>
Re: list vs array <ebohlman@omsdev.com>
Re: list vs array <tadmc@augustmail.com>
Re: list vs array <nospam@nospam.com>
Re: list vs array <sbryce@scottbryce.com>
Re: list vs array <usa1@llenroc.ude.invalid>
Re: list vs array <sbryce@scottbryce.com>
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:25:34 -0400
From: "daniel kaplan" <nospam@nospam.com>
Subject: Re: list vs array
Message-Id: <1098545169.69233@nntp.acecape.com>
> No, but you _are_ indeed the only one who is not familiar with how UseNet
> works.
sinan,
seriously, you are wound up too tight....if i upset you so much stop reading
my posts. it's kind of like changing the channel. am i the politest and
post effeicient poster, not even close. but the C language related groups
definitly do not have anyone like you. must a Perl thing.
seriosuly, want to flame me, then by all means...just say so, and we can
this private over email. but in my opinion, you're not just wasting my time
having to your read "lambast" only posts, but maybe others as well, who like
to follow threads, because they know in doing so, they might learn how to do
something differently. granted this was a very simple thread, but still,
it's the principle.
instead we've littered this thread with useless back and forth over nothing.
so if you wish to continue flaming me, my email is PosterNYC [AT] A
O L [DOT] com.
because i will now do as tad has done with me, stop reading your posts....at
the very least he kept his word to stop.
go out, have a beer or something, and chill
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:52:45 -0400
From: "daniel kaplan" <nospam@nospam.com>
Subject: Re: list vs array
Message-Id: <1098546800.540192@nntp.acecape.com>
> Meh. I have yet to see *one* of those "Teach yourself in 24 hour/7
> days/30 days/whatever" books that was worth using for more than a Ramen
> lid-weight. I haven't read this one in particular, so I'm prepared to
> accept that it might be the exception to the rule - but I highly doubt it.
well i can't say what is good or bad since i am still too new. but in terms
of using it as a reference, it is quick to go through, and while perhaps not
in depth on all topics, it covers a wide range...
> You're using Windows, right? As far as I know, a "DOS box" is still
> available. It's not worth very much, but it's plenty capable of running
> the "perldoc" tool that's so often mentioned here.
well yes, but my first attempt here was doing it locally and i was using
activestate's komodo to write, and debug. i fould that program
sooooooooooooo slow, that when the eval was over, they offered to extend it
another 30 days, and i was like, thanks, but no thanks....so i switched to
the current method.
but am heading the local, comanndline route as of last night, i need my
debuger!
> Not always - but in this case you can come pretty close. Have a look at
> ActiveState's "Visual Perl" - I haven't used it, but I've heard that it
> integrates with Visual Studio pretty well.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 16:02:53 GMT
From: "Jürgen Exner" <jurgenex@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: list vs array
Message-Id: <Ngved.1573$8W6.1449@trnddc05>
daniel kaplan wrote:
> ? For what??
>>
>> You really need to start providing some context in your posts...
>
> was thanking jim for his advice....am i the only one that looks at
> the order of the threading?
For one part: maybe, maybe not. Either way, it is ill advised to rely on
something that may or may not be the case.
But foremost because of the way Usenet works and how individual messages are
propagated people may very well not have the context for a whole slew of
reasons, some of them being:
- the original article has not propagated to their newsserver yet
- the original article was lost/killed/... on its way to their newsserver
and will never arrive there
- the original article was killfiled for whatever reason (spam catch words,
obnoxius author, ....)
- the original article was read already and therefore doesn't show up in the
standard view any longer (I guess _many_ people are hiding read articles)
Therefore any article for the public should provide as much context as
necessary to be understood on its own merits.
If it's something personal between you and the OP where you can assume both
of you are familiar with the context at hand then by all means send a mail
and leave out as much as you like, that is what it is for.
But for News you cannot assume that people ever read the original article,
either because they didn't want to or because they didn't have a chance to.
jue
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 10:12:30 -0600
From: Scott Bryce <sbryce@scottbryce.com>
Subject: Re: list vs array
Message-Id: <10nl0ne6pc9epc9@corp.supernews.com>
daniel kaplan wrote:
> seriously, you are wound up too tight.
He is just asking you to play by the rules. It makes life easier for
everybody. If you keep asking people to ignore your posts, people are
likely to do just that.
Take the advice you have been given, and learn to play nice. It will be
to everybody's advantage, especially yours.
BTW, I have my newsreader set to list posts by date. It makes it easier
to find the most recent posts. So I don't see posts in context. That is
why including some context is important.
The rules aren't arbitrary. They serve an important purpose. And, yes,
they are enforced rather rigidly here. But that shouldn't matter if you
are willing to follow them.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 12:15:05 -0400
From: "daniel kaplan" <nospam@nospam.com>
Subject: Re: list vs array
Message-Id: <1098548136.589704@nntp.acecape.com>
- the original article has not propagated to their newsserver yet
- the original article was lost/killed/... on its way to their newsserver
and will never arrive there
good point, in fact as i read your post i realized that i have experienced
this before where people were answering my post, and my original post never
showed on my server....thanks for taking the time to explain it a nice and
understandable way....will make sure i reference from now on....
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 17:15:10 -0400
From: "daniel kaplan" <nospam@nospam.com>
Subject: Re: list vs array
Message-Id: <1098566146.701546@nntp.acecape.com>
> BTW, I have my newsreader set to list posts by date. It makes it easier
> to find the most recent posts. So I don't see posts in context. That is
> why including some context is important.
as i stated in a recent reply....some gentlemen brought up the "some
orginial posts don't make it to all servers"... i realized that that happens
to me on some of my original posts...which doesn't effect me at that point,
but as well, i know lot's of people like to read all threads, yyou never
know what you will learn by doing so.
> He is just asking you to play by the rules. It makes life easier for
> everybody. If you keep asking people to ignore your posts, people are
> likely to do just that.
that may very well happen, and those will be my consequences
> Take the advice you have been given, and learn to play nice. It will be
> to everybody's advantage, especially yours.
um, with all do respect...read some of the posts, i have been playing nice,
in spite of some of the answers
> The rules aren't arbitrary. They serve an important purpose. And, yes,
> they are enforced rather rigidly here. But that shouldn't matter if you
> are willing to follow them.
again seriously, go to vc.language, i know i said this before, but everyone
virtually gets answered. without lectures or the type...seriously, i've
been given some serious attitude and postering. and i have to believe
somewhere in your rules it has to say, take personal problems aside and in
private.
look at the length of this thread. it belongs in some record book. do you
really think that is purely this length, and this ridiculous soley because
of me? come on....
------------------------------
Date: 23 Oct 2004 21:46:13 GMT
From: "A. Sinan Unur" <usa1@llenroc.ude.invalid>
Subject: Re: list vs array
Message-Id: <Xns958BB4C47A1AEasu1cornelledu@132.236.56.8>
"daniel kaplan" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in
news:1098566146.701546@nntp.acecape.com:
>> The rules aren't arbitrary. They serve an important purpose. And,
>> yes, they are enforced rather rigidly here. But that shouldn't matter
>> if you are willing to follow them.
> again seriously, go to vc.language,
Seriously, thank you very much for this recommendation. Reading that group,
and in particular, one specific post has provided me with enough
entertainment for quite some time to come:
http://tinyurl.com/63c9k (Google groups)
> look at the length of this thread. it belongs in some record book.
> do you really think that is purely this length, and this ridiculous
> soley because of me?
The thread started when you asked a FAQ without checking the FAQ list. When
you were pointed to the FAQ, you replied with another FAQ. So, we keep
going 'round 'n 'round.
Sinan
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 16:47:41 -0600
From: Scott Bryce <sbryce@scottbryce.com>
Subject: Re: list vs array
Message-Id: <10nlnselpp0591@corp.supernews.com>
daniel kaplan wrote:
> um, with all do respect...read some of the posts, i have been playing nice,
> in spite of some of the answers
You have attempted to be cordial, but you have not been following the
posting guidelines. They are there for a reason. They facilitate clear
communication. You will also find that if you follow them, you will
discover some of the answers to your questions yourself.
> again seriously, go to vc.language
This isn't vc.language.
> seriously, i've
> been given some serious attitude and postering.
You have been asked to follow the posting guidelines. We can help you
better if you help us help you.
> look at the length of this thread. it belongs in some record book. do you
> really think that is purely this length, and this ridiculous soley because
> of me?
This happens every once in a while when someone jumps in here and
refuses to play by the rules. Either they get it and change they way
they post, or they get ignored.
The rules aren't there to make life difficult for you. They are there to
make life easier for everybody, even you.
As far as the attitude goes, you should see how I was treated when I
first started posting here! I have learned from those "rude" posts. I am
a better Perl coder for it.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 18:59:26 -0400
From: "daniel kaplan" <nospam@nospam.com>
Subject: Re: list vs array
Message-Id: <1098572401.870157@nntp.acecape.com>
> look at the length of this thread. it belongs in some record book. do
you
> really think that is purely this length, and this ridiculous soley because
> of me?
>>This happens every once in a while when someone jumps in here and
>>refuses to play by the rules. Either they get it and change they way
>>they post, or they get ignored.
wow, with all dur respect scott, rudeness is rudeness, to throw blame on the
reciever of that because of not following posts, that's like an automechanic
blaming his tools for doing a bad job. my posts, bad or not...may be the
excuse, but the behavior is in the posters themselves...
this thread was answered about a day or so ago, can we finally allow this
threat to just die quickly?
------------------------------
Date: 23 Oct 2004 23:25:22 GMT
From: Eric Bohlman <ebohlman@omsdev.com>
Subject: Re: list vs array
Message-Id: <Xns958BBC52FFE9Bebohlmanomsdevcom@130.133.1.4>
AaronJSherman@gmail.com (Aaron Sherman) wrote in
news:a2d0070.0410221615.397a84f8@posting.google.com:
> Ok, so in answer to your original question: an array is a kind of
> variable in Perl. A list is a more conceptual thing created on-the-fly
> when you do something like list items in parens, separated by commmas:
>
> (1,2,3,4)
>
> or pass "lists" of values around:
>
> @foo = sort @bar.
>
> @foo and @bar are arrays, but what you're passing to sort and what
> gets returned from sort are lists of values, unassociated with any
> particular array until you store them into @foo.
I'm sorry, but that's *not* a satisfactory explanation. Enclosing comma-
separated items in parentheses does *not* always create a list, and
believing that parentheses act as "list constructors" can *really* lead a
newbie to develop some incorrect mental models about how Perl works (for
example, assuming that the context of an assignment is determined by what's
on the right side), models that the newbie will eventually have to
*unlearn* in order to make further progress. Unlearning incorrect stuff
and replacing it with correct stuff is quite a bit *harder* than learning
the correct stuff from scratch.
There's a good reason why most of the regulars here will point a newbie to
the FAQ rather than trying to answer the question directly, and you just
illustrated it. The FAQs can be reasonably trusted not to give newbies
misleading advice. A newbie, by definition, doesn't have enough experience
to tell if he's getting correct advice, wildly incorrect advice, advice
that would be correct if it weren't for a minor slipup in the explanation
or, as in this case, incomplete advice that's been so oversimplified as to
be misleading. Even very experienced regulars have slipped up when they've
broken this rule; of course there were followup corrections, but consider
that many newbies may have stopped reading this group once they got what
they thought was the answer to their question.
Correctly explaining something to someone who doesn't yet understand the
topic is *very hard work*. It's something that can't be done, at least not
done well, casually. The authors of the FAQs have done that hard work.
It's insulting both to them and to newbies to ignore that effort and offer
a half-assed substitute instead. The poster who refers a newbie to the FAQ
is showing respect to both.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 18:47:39 -0500
From: Tad McClellan <tadmc@augustmail.com>
Subject: Re: list vs array
Message-Id: <slrncnlrcr.2k7.tadmc@magna.augustmail.com>
Scott Bryce <sbryce@scottbryce.com> wrote:
> daniel kaplan wrote:
>> seriously, i've
>> been given some serious attitude and postering.
You reap what you sow.
>> look at the length of this thread. it belongs in some record book. do you
>> really think that is purely this length, and this ridiculous soley because
>> of me?
Yes. We've seen this sort of thing many many times before.
> As far as the attitude goes, you should see how I was treated when I
> first started posting here! I have learned from those "rude" posts. I am
> a better Perl coder for it.
Hey! Your feet stink!
So there.
--
Tad McClellan SGML consulting
tadmc@augustmail.com Perl programming
Fort Worth, Texas
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 20:00:26 -0400
From: "daniel kaplan" <nospam@nospam.com>
Subject: Re: list vs array
Message-Id: <1098576062.105691@nntp.acecape.com>
> You reap what you sow.
wasn't rude to a soul....some people need to learn to let insignificant
things just go...they should learn, keeps blood pressure and keeps your body
fresh and healthy for the battles that actually matter....i'd point you to a
faq for that, but they don't exist, just common sense.
> > As far as the attitude goes, you should see how I was treated when I
> > first started posting here! I have learned from those "rude" posts. I am
> > a better Perl coder for it.
>
>
> Hey! Your feet stink!
>
i don't get, it, especially since that wasn't my post...
hey tad, thought you were going to stop reading my posts....but since
obviosuly you just can't, i'll give you the same invite i gave sinan:
seriosuly, want to flame me, then by all means...just say so, and we can
this private over email. but in my opinion, you're not just wasting my time
having to your read "lambast" only posts, but maybe others as well, who like
to follow threads, because they know in doing so, they might learn how to do
something differently. granted this was a very simple thread, but still,
it's the principle.
instead we've littered this thread with useless back and forth over nothing.
so if you wish to continue flaming me, my email is PosterNYC [AT] A
O L [DOT] com.
i'm sure everyone is sick of reading this....so if you really have a problem
with ME, you can either just stop keeping this thread alive...and stop, OR
feel free to email me and we can flame each other all we want in private.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 18:51:36 -0600
From: Scott Bryce <sbryce@scottbryce.com>
Subject: Re: list vs array
Message-Id: <10nlv4t9erpj98f@corp.supernews.com>
daniel kaplan wrote:
> wow, with all dur respect scott, rudeness is rudeness, to throw blame on the
> reciever of that because of not following posts, that's like an automechanic
> blaming his tools for doing a bad job.
Bad analogy. Nobody was being rude to you. They asked you to follow the
posting guidelines, and you refused. It is more like the mechanic trying
to fix the car, and the car complaining because it doesn't think it
should have to have it parts replaced.
Have you read the posting guidelines for this group?
------------------------------
Date: 24 Oct 2004 00:52:36 GMT
From: "A. Sinan Unur" <usa1@llenroc.ude.invalid>
Subject: Re: list vs array
Message-Id: <Xns958BD458C5776asu1cornelledu@132.236.56.8>
"daniel kaplan" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in
news:1098576062.105691@nntp.acecape.com:
DK = "daniel kaplan"
[ attributions snipped by DK. Tried to re-construct, but apologies in
advance for any mistakes.
]
Tad McClellan <tadmc@augustmail.com> wrote in
news:slrncnlrcr.2k7.tadmc@magna.augustmail.com:
>> You reap what you sow.
>
> wasn't rude to a soul....
It is indeed rude to snip attributions when replying.
> some people need to learn to let insignificant things just go...they
> should learn, keeps blood pressure and keeps your body fresh and healthy
> for the battles that actually matter ...
I am willing to be that neither Tad's nor my blood pressure increased as a
result of replying to your posts. On the other hand, given the number of
spelling errors per sentence you have been making, I am willing to bet you
are in quite a huff.
That is neither here nor there, however. I am also willing to bet that you
still have not read the posting guidelines for this group. That is the
pinnacle of rudeness. There are a few rules everyone here is expected to
follow to make life easier for everyone.
> Tad McClellan <tadmc@augustmail.com> wrote in
> news:slrncnlrcr.2k7.tadmc@magna.augustmail.com:
>
>> Scott Bryce <sbryce@scottbryce.com> wrote:
>>> As far as the attitude goes, you should see how I was treated when I
>>> first started posting here! I have learned from those "rude" posts. I
>>> am a better Perl coder for it.
>>
>> Hey! Your feet stink!
>>
>> So there.
>>
> i don't get, it, especially since that wasn't my post...
Of course, you don't get it. Tad did not snip attributions and he did not
remove all context. Just to clue you in: Tad's comment above is a joke
directed at Scott. That is made obvious by the "So there" but then, you
snipped that.
> hey tad, thought you were going to stop reading my posts ...
He did not read your post. He read a response to one of your posts.
> seriosuly, want to flame me, then by all means...just say so, and we
> can this private over email.
You are trying to make this interaction personal, and it just ain't. The
posting guidelines for this group make it worthwhile for the experts to
help the clueless such as myself. I do not want to lose those resources.
> but in my opinion, you're not just wasting my time having to your read
> "lambast" only posts,
How does any of reminding you to read the guidelines, to consult the FAQ
list, not to snip attributions, not to remove context etc qualify as
"lambast"?
> granted this was a very simple thread, but still, it's the principle.
Yes, it is the principle. And the principle says, once you have been
politely directed to a FAQ (see news:1098463265.457208@nntp.acecape.com),
you go read it and the thread ends.
> so if you really have a problem with ME,
No one has a problem with _you_ but with the way you have been behaving.
Sinan
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 18:57:36 -0600
From: Scott Bryce <sbryce@scottbryce.com>
Subject: Re: list vs array
Message-Id: <10nlvg031plj36a@corp.supernews.com>
daniel kaplan wrote:
>>Hey! Your feet stink!
> i don't get, it, especially since that wasn't my post...
No, MY feet stink. I told you that I have learned a lot from "rude"
responses in this newsgroup, so Tad is being rude to me. I'm not sure
what I'm supposed to learn this time.
Really, the folks here are very helpful if you will help them help you.
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 2001 21:33:47 GMT (Last modified)
From: Perl-Users-Request@ruby.oce.orst.edu (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
Subject: Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01)
Message-Id: <null>
Administrivia:
#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.
NOTE: due to the current flood of worm email banging on ruby, the smtp
server on ruby has been shut off until further notice.
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.
#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 V10 Issue 7292
***************************************
