[25329] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 7574 Volume: 10
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Sun Dec 26 14:05:38 2004
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 11:05:08 -0800 (PST)
From: Perl-Users Digest <Perl-Users-Request@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU>
To: Perl-Users@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Perl-Users Digest Sun, 26 Dec 2004 Volume: 10 Number: 7574
Today's topics:
Re: How to navigate the docs? <heecheedamnspam@mindless.com.blablablabla>
Re: How to navigate the docs? <uri@stemsystems.com>
Re: Is zero even or odd? <dseaman@no.such.host>
Re: Is zero even or odd? <dseaman@no.such.host>
Re: Is zero even or odd? <jfields@austininstruments.com>
Re: Is zero even or odd? <jfields@austininstruments.com>
Re: Is zero even or odd? <see@sig.com>
Re: Is zero even or odd? <dseaman@no.such.host>
Re: perl <tadmc@augustmail.com>
Re: Problem with Open Perl IDE <gogala@sbcglobal.net>
Re: Problem with Open Perl IDE <wyzelli@yahoo.com>
Sessions with only standard modules <l.fellmann@free.fr>
Re: Sessions with only standard modules <noreply@gunnar.cc>
Re: Sessions with only standard modules <l.fellmann@free.fr>
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 14:36:02 +0100
From: Kai Spitzley <heecheedamnspam@mindless.com.blablablabla>
Subject: Re: How to navigate the docs?
Message-Id: <ugfts092g3melq368adcfgg6e2ie1gdm6k@4ax.com>
Mike <please@send.replies.to.ng> felt like saying:
> What do you do when you want to find something in the Perl
> documentation, and you have *no idea* in which of the many perlxxxx
> it is? I've tried perltoc in the past with little success.
A man -k equivalent for Perl would a godsend.
--
As far as I know we never had an undetected error.
# Kai Spitzley http://heechee.net #
# ICQ# 1763501 PGP key available #
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 18:27:05 GMT
From: Uri Guttman <uri@stemsystems.com>
Subject: Re: How to navigate the docs?
Message-Id: <x7brcgncef.fsf@mail.sysarch.com>
>>>>> "KS" == Kai Spitzley <heecheedamnspam@mindless.com.blablablabla> writes:
KS> Mike <please@send.replies.to.ng> felt like saying:
>> What do you do when you want to find something in the Perl
>> documentation, and you have *no idea* in which of the many perlxxxx
>> it is? I've tried perltoc in the past with little success.
KS> A man -k equivalent for Perl would a godsend.
perl's docs are usually converted to man forms upon installation. if you
install them in their own directory (part of the configure process) you
can then build their own man -k index. then you can do man -Mperlmandir
-k (using your dir for the perl man pages).
you do have to rebuild the index when you install new modules.
so there is a man -k (not even an equivalent) but you have to set it up.
another idea is to install tkman/glimpse. it gives you full doc search
and it has commands to rebuild the glimpse indexes. you can use this for
your entire man set and when searching select a subset of man dirs. tkman
is a decent man gui (even if it is written in tk). it also handles
texinfo which is a nice plus.
uri
--
Uri Guttman ------ uri@stemsystems.com -------- http://www.stemsystems.com
--Perl Consulting, Stem Development, Systems Architecture, Design and Coding-
Search or Offer Perl Jobs ---------------------------- http://jobs.perl.org
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 13:56:23 +0000 (UTC)
From: Dave Seaman <dseaman@no.such.host>
Subject: Re: Is zero even or odd?
Message-Id: <cqmfu7$mcp$1@mailhub227.itcs.purdue.edu>
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 07:53:46 GMT, vonroach wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 19:46:25 GMT, "Nicholas O. Lindan" <see@sig.com>
> wrote:
>>0^0 is a mess in either system.
> A meaningless mess. As Pauli might say `it isn't even wrong'. And
> Heisenberg would add a `pile of crap'.
0^0 is the cardinality of the set of mappings from the empty set to itself.
There is exactly one such mapping. Hence, 0^0 = 1.
<http://db.uwaterloo.ca/~alopez-o/math-faq/node40.html#SECTION00530000000000000000>
--
Dave Seaman
Judge Yohn's mistakes revealed in Mumia Abu-Jamal ruling.
<http://www.commoncouragepress.com/index.cfm?action=book&bookid=228>
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 14:37:07 +0000 (UTC)
From: Dave Seaman <dseaman@no.such.host>
Subject: Re: Is zero even or odd?
Message-Id: <cqmiaj$ndd$2@mailhub227.itcs.purdue.edu>
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 07:14:41 GMT, vonroach wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 20:06:21 +0000 (UTC), Dave Seaman
><dseaman@no.such.host> wrote:
>>On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 18:17:17 GMT, Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:
>>> "Dave Seaman" <dseaman@no.such.host> wrote
>>
>>>> Perhaps I should have said that the Continuum Hypothesis (CH) is the
>>>> "hypothesis" (rather than the "proposition") that c = aleph_1. The final
>>>> clause says that CH is neither provable nor disprovable; that's what
>>>> "independent of the axioms" means.
>>
>>> Agreed, figured out what I thought you meant, and I think that is what
>>> you thought you meant.
>>
>>> In the original it was hard to tell assertions from negations from
>>> perambulations. It seemed to negate an assertion then assert the first
>>> assertion and conclude that nothing could be asserted or negated.
>>
>>> Did I get that right?
>>
>>I know what I said, but I don't see how I can answer questions about how
>>it seemed to you. Such propositions are independent of my axioms.
> I would be glad to sum up what you both said. It fits quite well in
> these remarks about zero.
<http://mathworld.wolfram.com/ContinuumHypothesis.html>
--
Dave Seaman
Judge Yohn's mistakes revealed in Mumia Abu-Jamal ruling.
<http://www.commoncouragepress.com/index.cfm?action=book&bookid=228>
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 10:29:01 -0600
From: John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com>
Subject: Re: Is zero even or odd?
Message-Id: <eipts0dj403uus4ih7281mims11ao62g7i@4ax.com>
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 06:57:26 GMT, vonroach <hadrainc@earthlink.net>
wrote:
>On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 10:52:34 -0600, John Fields
><jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>
>>Well... Not _really_, it's just a thought measurement.
>>---
>Careful, you are getting into Planck's range there.
---
Careful? Why?
--
John Fields
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 12:08:16 -0600
From: John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com>
Subject: Re: Is zero even or odd?
Message-Id: <1ltts0t93plvdensm8u68sgubignbd9c8s@4ax.com>
On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 00:23:49 +0100, Michael Mendelsohn
<invalid@msgid.michael.mendelsohn.de> wrote:
>John Fields schrieb:
>> ---
>> I'm not trying to be insulting, but would you mind explaining how the
>> current was measured?
>
>
>By putting an instrument into the circuit where I wanted to measure the
>current.
---
OK, but, unfortunately, placing the ammeter inside the short can only
give ambiguous results.
---
>Presumbly that branch of the circuit had a box marked "resistor" in it,
>which should have contained a 100 Ohm resistor, so measured as if that
>had been there, but when I opened the box, I found it empty.
---
But, with the short in place, as you've shown it, it would be
impossible to determine whether the resistor was there or not, let
alone determining its value.
---
>We're talking about hypothetical boxes and hypothetical resistors here,
>because I am trying to model a 0/0 quotient using an electrical circuit
>in the attempt show to Nicholas O. Lindan ("Nick" for short) that simply
>assuming that this quotient is 1 is a little reckless.
---
The problem with your rig is that, since
E
R = ---
I
the I term is meaningless since it doesn't flow through the resistor
and can't be considered as affecting the equation in any way. It's
kind of like turning on the shower and expecting that to change the
setting on your toaster!
---
>> >> you would have measured the entire supply voltage minus what was being
>> >> dropped across the load by the current flowing through the meter and
>> >> you would have concluded that by subtracting the meter current that
>> >> you would have had:
>> >>
>> >> E E
>> >> R = --- = --- = oo
>> >> I 0
>> >>
>> >> Which would have been right!
>> >
>> >Unless E=0 too, in which case the result is 1 (says Nick).
>> >
>> >On a short circuit you can detect no voltage, but you can measure a
>> >current.
>> >
>> > E 0
>> > R = --- = --- = 0
>> > I I
>> >
>> >This leads to a contradiction when E=I=0.
---
I don't see why. Consider: Since
x
y = --- = 1
x
is certainly true for x = 1, x = 0.5, x = 0.25, and doesn't seem to
change as x diminishes toward, through and into the negative realm on
the other side of zero, why should there be an anomaly where x = 0?.
---
>> So it would seem, but a short across the resistor would still have
>> resulted in a voltage drop across the resistor equal to the parallel
>> resistance of the resistor and the short multiplied by the current
>> through that parallel resistance. Since there's no such thing as a
>> perfect short and the resistance of the resistor was known beforehand,
>
>If the short is "short enough", it can be perfect enough for my
>instrument to not detect the voltage drop.
---
If you can make a short that short, I can make an instrument sensitive
enough to detect the voltgae drop across it, or doing it the easy way,
measure the current through the short!-)
---
>> the "short" and the anomalous current (which you said you measured)
>> through it should have pointed to either the resistor failing shorted,
>> an external short developing across the resistor, or some dirty
>> bastard stealing the resistor and putting a short across where it was,
>> no?
>
>The short is not in the path of the current I've measured. I've only
>invented the short to explain why there can be 0V across the (stolen?)
>resistor.
>
> +---------------------(V)----+
> | |
>(-)-----o-------[__R__]---o---(A)----o--------(+)
> |____________________________|
> the short
>
>>
>> How much was that resistor worth, anyway?
>
>A lot of thought.
<G>
--
John Fields
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 18:32:19 GMT
From: "Nicholas O. Lindan" <see@sig.com>
Subject: Re: Is zero even or odd?
Message-Id: <TsDzd.2820$qf5.1807@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>
"Dave Seaman" <dseaman@no.such.host> wrote
> 0^0 is the cardinality of the set of mappings from the empty set to itself.
> There is exactly one such mapping. Hence, 0^0 = 1.
The only answer that makes sense, though it may be of the 'non' variety.
It doesn't consistently approach it as a limit, though:
1) lim[n -> 0] n^0 = 1
2) lim[n -> 0] 0^n = 0
* * *
A contrarian view, that there are more than one 0, as there are more
than one oo, would say:
3) 0 ^ 1 = 0
4) 0 ^ 0.5 = sqrt(0) > 0
5) sqrt(0) * sqrt(0) = 0
and this somehow makes it palatable that eq. (2) is not equal to 0 in
the limit but to 1, and in agreement with eq. (1).
In search of a self-consistent fantasy, I confess.
--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
Remove spaces etc. to reply: n o lindan at net com dot com
psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 18:53:24 +0000 (UTC)
From: Dave Seaman <dseaman@no.such.host>
Subject: Re: Is zero even or odd?
Message-Id: <cqn1b4$uqb$1@mailhub227.itcs.purdue.edu>
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 18:32:19 GMT, Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:
> "Dave Seaman" <dseaman@no.such.host> wrote
>> 0^0 is the cardinality of the set of mappings from the empty set to itself.
>> There is exactly one such mapping. Hence, 0^0 = 1.
> The only answer that makes sense, though it may be of the 'non' variety.
> It doesn't consistently approach it as a limit, though:
It's not the only answer that makes sense. It's equally sensible to
point out that if M is a multiplicative monoid with identity e, then x^0
= e for each x in M. The indicated expression is an empty product, which
evaluates to the identity (= 1 in the monoid of the reals). The fact
that the algebraic view leads to the same conclusion as the set-theoretic
one is a clue that something is right about that conclusion.
> 1) lim[n -> 0] n^0 = 1
That's related to a different question, not the one I was discussing.
> A contrarian view, that there are more than one 0, as there are more
> than one oo, would say:
> 3) 0 ^ 1 = 0
> 4) 0 ^ 0.5 = sqrt(0) > 0
Doesn't follow.
> 5) sqrt(0) * sqrt(0) = 0
--
Dave Seaman
Judge Yohn's mistakes revealed in Mumia Abu-Jamal ruling.
<http://www.commoncouragepress.com/index.cfm?action=book&bookid=228>
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 10:06:56 -0600
From: Tad McClellan <tadmc@augustmail.com>
Subject: Re: perl
Message-Id: <slrncstod0.jog.tadmc@magna.augustmail.com>
John W. Krahn <someone@example.com> wrote:
> Tad McClellan wrote:
>> ravi <ravikumarbe@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>I want Perl notes and study material.
>>
>> I want to lose 15 pounds.
>
> That's about $29 U.S.
I also want the erosion of the US dollar to stop, it is
cutting into my Vast Personal Fortune.
> Do you play poker?
I've noticed that I seem to get asked that a lot shortly after
making reference to a surplus in my VPF.
I wonder why that is?
--
Tad McClellan SGML consulting
tadmc@augustmail.com Perl programming
Fort Worth, Texas
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 08:09:07 -0500
From: Mladen Gogala <gogala@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: Problem with Open Perl IDE
Message-Id: <pan.2004.12.26.13.09.07.414162@sbcglobal.net>
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 13:35:26 +0100, Michele Dondi wrote:
> I can't remember its name,
> though...
Eclipse. It's called "Eclipse Platform". More can be
seen on www.eclipse.org
--
Artificial Intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 13:24:45 GMT
From: "Peter Wyzl" <wyzelli@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Problem with Open Perl IDE
Message-Id: <xYyzd.89061$K7.66630@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
"Michele Dondi" <bik.mido@tiscalinet.it> wrote in message
news:t9qns0l8o4hs52dr2s7dsm0qkfm7glcn2u@4ax.com...
: On 23 Dec 2004 05:39:16 -0800, "cbr" <chris_breemer@nl.compuware.com>
: wrote:
:
: >I'm using the Open Perl IDE to play around with Perl.
:
: Unfortunately I can't help you with this: even if I have occasionally
: toyed with the idea of trying out some IDE first or later, my generic
: answer remains "use a real editor"! Yes, it's an answer with an
: attitude, but undoubtedly with a kidding tone, so hopefully you won't
: take it as a personal offence. But then if you really want to use and
: IDE I've heard good cmts recently about a Java development tool for
: which someone has created an extension dedicated to Perl, and AFAIK
: it's not listed in 'perldoc -q IDE'. I can't remember its name,
: though...
Perlbuilder from Solutionsoft http://www.solutionsoft.com/
Komodo from Activestate http://www.activestate.com/
No doubt there are many others. I am having trouble getting my head around
the idea of a Java IDE to write Perl (had a look on their site quickly but
didn't find much, though I understand it is supposed to be 'language
independent". Didn't Larry say "Nothing can parse Perl but perl"?).
Also wonder what you mean by "a real editor"? I always thought the 'real
editor' was the person, anything else is just a tool...
--
Wyzelli
------------------------------
Date: 26 Dec 2004 15:02:30 GMT
From: Leo Fellmann <l.fellmann@free.fr>
Subject: Sessions with only standard modules
Message-Id: <338246F3uc8q4U1@individual.net>
-----BEGIN xxx SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi all,
I have to write a few CGI scripts and my webhost has both PHP and perl.
I'd far rather use perl, but I probably will need session tracking.
The problem is that
a) my host does not have anything aside from the standard modules. No mod_perl, no
CGI:Session.
b) I can't install modules locally due to not having acess to the necessary tools. no
command-line perl etc.
So what I'd like to know is if there's any way I could do session tracking with just
CGI.pm or if it's not worth the bother and I should just have to grit my teeth and
use PHP?
I know what the answer's probably going to be :(
- --
Leo Fellmann
-----BEGIN xxx SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFB0da+wjjtrLvNMRARAj5MAJ0YVZh0A6xvGvtnKEzoXdtoUEubggCgwIay
cNL70T8oH1fyj4viDHruGzY=
=9gn9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 18:05:10 +0100
From: Gunnar Hjalmarsson <noreply@gunnar.cc>
Subject: Re: Sessions with only standard modules
Message-Id: <338a40F3t0h06U1@individual.net>
Leo Fellmann wrote:
> I have to write a few CGI scripts and my webhost has both PHP and perl.
> I'd far rather use perl, but I probably will need session tracking.
> The problem is that
> a) my host does not have anything aside from the standard modules. No
> mod_perl, no CGI:Session.
>
> b) I can't install modules locally due to not having acess to the
> necessary tools. no command-line perl etc.
Pure Perl modules can be 'installed' locally by simply uploading the
*.pm files to appropriate directories. I believe CGI::Session is such a
pure Perl module that does not need to be pre-compiled. If that's the
case, you can designate a directory for Perl modules, upload the
necessary files into that directory (appying the right structure), and
include something like
use lib '/path/to/local/Perl/library';
at the beginning of your scripts.
--
Gunnar Hjalmarsson
Email: http://www.gunnar.cc/cgi-bin/contact.pl
------------------------------
Date: 26 Dec 2004 18:05:01 GMT
From: Leo Fellmann <l.fellmann@free.fr>
Subject: Re: Sessions with only standard modules
Message-Id: <338cqdF3tf7egU1@individual.net>
-----BEGIN xxx SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Gunnar Hjalmarsson wrote:
| Leo Fellmann wrote:
|
|> I have to write a few CGI scripts and my webhost has both PHP and perl.
|> I'd far rather use perl, but I probably will need session tracking.
|> The problem is that
|> a) my host does not have anything aside from the standard modules. No
|> mod_perl, no CGI:Session.
|>
|> b) I can't install modules locally due to not having acess to the
|> necessary tools. no command-line perl etc.
|
|
| Pure Perl modules can be 'installed' locally by simply uploading the
| *.pm files to appropriate directories. I believe CGI::Session is such a
| pure Perl module that does not need to be pre-compiled. If that's the
| case, you can designate a directory for Perl modules, upload the
| necessary files into that directory (appying the right structure), and
| include something like
|
| use lib '/path/to/local/Perl/library';
|
| at the beginning of your scripts.
Yes. I tried that, but CGI::Session unfortunately won't behave. It complains about
auxiliary files not being there, that I presume should have been created during
installation.
I can't do much about it, lacking both make and perl.
I will have another go, as I've just read the makefile and can't quite see why it was
misbehaving. If all else fails I could ask the host to install it but they are very
likely not around for the near future, it being holiday season.
- --
Leo Fellmann
-----BEGIN xxx SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFB0gGEwjjtrLvNMRARAj6kAKDBa/m2nVD3/TToQjMN3p8k5wdCdQCfR9iT
p2tybutvRr5Uab8si2vZ2tY=
=sJ/6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
------------------------------
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 7574
***************************************
