[25055] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 7305 Volume: 10
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Mon Oct 25 18:10:40 2004
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 15:10:09 -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 Mon, 25 Oct 2004 Volume: 10 Number: 7305
Today's topics:
Re: MAIL recommendation <sbryce@scottbryce.com>
Re: MAIL recommendation <nospam@nospam.com>
Re: MAIL recommendation <cwilbur@mithril.chromatico.net>
Re: MAIL recommendation <nospam@nospam.com>
Re: MAIL recommendation <phaylon@dunkelheit.at>
Re: MAIL recommendation <cwilbur@mithril.chromatico.net>
Re: MAIL recommendation <ron.parker@povray.org>
Re: MAIL recommendation <noreply@gunnar.cc>
Re: MAIL recommendation <cwilbur@mithril.chromatico.net>
Re: MAIL recommendation <noreply@gunnar.cc>
Re: Optimize Perl.. <perl@my-header.org>
Re: perl optimazation guide/book <lwt0301@bellsouth.net>
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 12:25:23 -0600
From: Scott Bryce <sbryce@scottbryce.com>
Subject: Re: MAIL recommendation
Message-Id: <10nqh8i204p979@corp.supernews.com>
daniel kaplan wrote:
> there are many different modules i can use to take care of email (sending
> and receiving), correct?
> if the answer is NO, please say so.
>
> but since i am pretty sure that the answer is YES, i am trying to see
> people's preferences, that's all.
And the preferences of the people who wrote the FAQ don't count? If the
FAQ says that MIME::Lite is the best module to use, then why would you
expect a different answer here?
I'm done. Tad is right.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 14:48:30 -0400
From: "daniel kaplan" <nospam@nospam.com>
Subject: Re: MAIL recommendation
Message-Id: <1098730167.386583@nntp.acecape.com>
> And the preferences of the people who wrote the FAQ don't count? If the
> FAQ says that MIME::Lite is the best module to use, then why would you
> expect a different answer here?
i would say, and i mean this respectfully so at least try to listen to what
i am saying, rather than who is saying it,
preferences vary...like the calm discussion i had with people on here
regarding IDE's. there are multiple chioces, people here might like one
over the other.
i am far from an expert, but if someone asks about Date routines, i will
immed. tell them what i learned (the hardway) about Date::Manip.
this, unlike a sytnax question, is about discussion, and opinion, or does
the FAQ always have to have the final word on all? i seriously have a hard
time understanding this group.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 19:19:01 GMT
From: Charlton Wilbur <cwilbur@mithril.chromatico.net>
Subject: Re: MAIL recommendation
Message-Id: <87mzyalipf.fsf@mithril.chromatico.net>
>>>>> "lazy fuckwit" == daniel kaplan <nospam@nospam.com> writes:
>> This isn't the place to ask questions that are answered in the
>> FAQ. This is one of the places where FAQ questions are
>> discussed and
lazy fuckwit> well then how about this charlton, are you telling
lazy fuckwit> me that asking people's opinions about which module
lazy fuckwit> they PREFER is a faq question?
Yes, I am telling you that it is.
Charlton
--
cwilbur at chromatico dot net
cwilbur at mac dot com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 15:26:34 -0400
From: "daniel kaplan" <nospam@nospam.com>
Subject: Re: MAIL recommendation
Message-Id: <1098732451.612153@nntp.acecape.com>
in reference to charlton's post:
just not reading your's anymore....good day
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 21:26:28 +0200
From: Robert Sedlacek <phaylon@dunkelheit.at>
Subject: Re: MAIL recommendation
Message-Id: <pan.2004.10.25.19.26.27.839461@dunkelheit.at>
daniel kaplan wrote:
> just not reading your's anymore....good day
How about a bit more efficiently? Though it's still a perl group. Why
don't you just killfile[1] everyone and just talk to those who have the
same opinion as you?
g,
Robert
[1] Oops, didn't read your "Newsreader"-Line till yet, so then:
s/killfile\[1\]/ignore/so;
--
http://www.dunkelheit.at/
Kunst kommt von Koennen, kaeme sie von Wollen, hiesse sie Wulst.
-- Nietzsche - Bonmot
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 19:49:00 GMT
From: Charlton Wilbur <cwilbur@mithril.chromatico.net>
Subject: Re: MAIL recommendation
Message-Id: <87654ylhaf.fsf@mithril.chromatico.net>
>>>>> "lazy fuckwit" == daniel kaplan <nospam@nospam.com> writes:
lazy fuckwit> this, unlike a sytnax question, is about discussion,
lazy fuckwit> and opinion, or does the FAQ always have to have the
lazy fuckwit> final word on all?
The FAQ does have the final word on all, because the people here are
the people who write the FAQ.
lazy fuckwit> i seriously have a hard time
lazy fuckwit> understanding this group.
That is why you have been pointed at least a dozen times to the
Posting Guidelines. That is where understanding lies.
Charlton
--
cwilbur at chromatico dot net
cwilbur at mac dot com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 15:07:58 -0500
From: Ron Parker <ron.parker@povray.org>
Subject: Re: MAIL recommendation
Message-Id: <slrncnqn8u.e1e.ron.parker@mail.parkrrrr.com>
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 21:26:28 +0200, Robert Sedlacek wrote:
> How about a bit more efficiently? Though it's still a perl group. Why
> don't you just killfile[1] everyone and just talk to those who have the
> same opinion as you?
Wouldn't it be easier and just as effective to unsubscribe?
--
#macro R(L P)sphere{L __}cylinder{L P __}#end#macro P(_1)union{R(z+_ z)R(-z _-z)
R(_-z*3_+z)torus{1__ clipped_by{plane{_ 0}}}translate z+_1}#end#macro S(_)9-(_1-
_)*(_1-_)#end#macro Z(_1 _ __)union{P(_)P(-_)R(y-z-1_)translate.1*_1-y*8pigment{
rgb<S(7)S(5)S(3)>}}#if(_1)Z(_1-__,_,__)#end#end Z(10x*-2,.2)camera{rotate x*90}
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 22:12:21 +0200
From: Gunnar Hjalmarsson <noreply@gunnar.cc>
Subject: Re: MAIL recommendation
Message-Id: <2u5538F26n0nkU1@uni-berlin.de>
Charlton Wilbur wrote:
> daniel kaplan wrote:
>> this, unlike a sytnax question, is about discussion, and opinion,
>> or does the FAQ always have to have the final word on all?
>
> The FAQ does have the final word on all, because the people here are
> the people who write the FAQ.
Charlton, even if you are annoyed, you should know better than making
such a BS statement.
The FAQ should indeed be consulted before asking questions here, but for
a number of reasons it does apparently not always cover every aspect of
a topic. Example reasons may be outdated questions and personal
preferences, not to mention that there is not 100% consensus about
everything.
Perl is much more than the FAQ.
--
Gunnar Hjalmarsson
Email: http://www.gunnar.cc/cgi-bin/contact.pl
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 20:46:33 GMT
From: Charlton Wilbur <cwilbur@mithril.chromatico.net>
Subject: Re: MAIL recommendation
Message-Id: <87wtxejzsa.fsf@mithril.chromatico.net>
>>>>> "GH" == Gunnar Hjalmarsson <noreply@gunnar.cc> writes:
GH> The FAQ should indeed be consulted before asking questions
GH> here, but for a number of reasons it does apparently not
GH> always cover every aspect of a topic. Example reasons may be
GH> outdated questions and personal preferences, not to mention
GH> that there is not 100% consensus about everything.
Have you missed the ongoing process, happening *here*, of updating
outdated questions? And have you failed to notice that when there is
a significant lack of consensus, the FAQ acknowledges that too?
If you're unhappy with the treatment of a subject in the FAQ, submit a
patch or bring it up here for discussion. That's what makes the FAQ
the authoritative word on the matter.
Charlton
--
cwilbur at chromatico dot net
cwilbur at mac dot com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 23:31:59 +0200
From: Gunnar Hjalmarsson <noreply@gunnar.cc>
Subject: Re: MAIL recommendation
Message-Id: <2u59psF26eqb0U1@uni-berlin.de>
Charlton Wilbur wrote:
> If you're unhappy with the treatment of a subject in the FAQ, submit
> a patch or bring it up here for discussion. That's what makes the
> FAQ the authoritative word on the matter.
Or *a* authoritative word on the matter. Don't forget TMTOWTDI. :) But
I agree, I should have brought up a few matters for discussion. (Suppose
that's true for most of us, btw.) Let me start now:
As regards the original question in this thread, and the related FAQ
entries, I did post an answer to the OP (even if he seems to have been
too buzy to acknowledge it...). I mentioned Mail::Sender and MIME::Lite.
I have never really used MIME::Lite, since I'm a happy user of
Mail::Sender since a few years. Both handle attachments, and both are
frequently recommended here and in similar forums. As regards
Mail::Sender, I know that its author is a seasoned Perl programmer who
is highly active in the Perl community (beginners@perl.org) and open for
discussing changes to the module.
Even if I'm not able to compare them, to me it appears as if
Mail::Sender deserves to be mentioned in the FAQ.
--
Gunnar Hjalmarsson
Email: http://www.gunnar.cc/cgi-bin/contact.pl
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 23:26:30 +0200
From: Matija Papec <perl@my-header.org>
Subject: Re: Optimize Perl..
Message-Id: <ppqqn0h3jb35maib0qdjrdf7r3fkm399sp@4ax.com>
X-Ftn-To: ctcgag@hotmail.com
ctcgag@hotmail.com wrote:
>> Usually they have good articles but this one isn't nearly there, and I
>> doubt that author is just making jokes in it?
>
>I fully expect that, in the next few days, I will be forwarded this article
>by someone in senior management, who will demand to know how many of these
>"best practises" I implement.
Well you don't have much time then; forget all your wrong and sinful
practices, and confess that you'll overcome them.
ps. I hope you're joking, right? :)
--
Matija
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 17:26:38 -0400
From: Laura <lwt0301@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: perl optimazation guide/book
Message-Id: <10nqs2jeaejhn10@news.supernews.com>
buildmorelines wrote:
> John Bokma <postmaster@castleamber.com> wrote in message
> news:<Xns958BC988381C8castleamber@130.133.1.4>...
>> buildmorelines wrote:
>>
>> > The fasterness was determined by running a perl script that runs a
>> > loop 20x that runs another perl through `` and processes smallprof.out
>> > getting the average. The other perl being run through `` is a one line
>> > perl program that is like "$r = pop(@array);" or "$r = $array[-1];"
>> > running with -d:SmallProf on the command line arguments to the
>> > interpreter.
>>
>> http://search.cpan.org/~nwclark/perl-5.8.5/lib/Benchmark.pm
>>
>> Note that benchmarks also depend on which Perl version you are running.
>
> Here you go.
>
> This is perl, v5.8.4 built for MSWin32-x86-multi-thread
> (with 3 registered patches, see perl -V for more detail)
>
> Copyright 1987-2004, Larry Wall
>
> Binary build 810 provided by ActiveState Corp. http://www.ActiveState.com
> ActiveState is a division of Sophos.
> Built Jun 1 2004 11:52:21
For relatively simple algorithms, the best way to test speed and
optimizations is to write an actual program in C which is line-for-line
equivalent to your Perl script. C, while primitive, is considered to be
the gold standard in speed. Some institutions will rate their code as 2x,
4x, 8x etc... as a multiple of the speed at which the code would run if it
were in C. Perl will do this conversion for you if you use the appropriate
module.
------------------------------
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 7305
***************************************
