[26398] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 8569 Volume: 10
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Tue Oct 25 21:05:14 2005
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 18:05:05 -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 Tue, 25 Oct 2005 Volume: 10 Number: 8569
Today's topics:
Re: FAQ 9.23 How do I find out my hostname/domainname/I <kst-u@mib.org>
Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ <my_email_is_posted_on_my_website@munged.invalid>
Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ <my_email_is_posted_on_my_website@munged.invalid>
Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ <my_email_is_posted_on_my_website@munged.invalid>
Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ <davids@webmaster.com>
Moving data structure around better than globals? <noreply@gunnar.cc>
Re: Moving data structure around better than globals? <mothra@nowhereatall.com>
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 22:21:56 GMT
From: Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Subject: Re: FAQ 9.23 How do I find out my hostname/domainname/IP address?
Message-Id: <lnd5lt9r0b.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org>
PerlFAQ Server <comdog@panix.com> writes:
[...]
> 9.23: How do I find out my hostname/domainname/IP address?
>
> The normal way to find your own hostname is to call the `hostname`
> program. While sometimes expedient, this has some problems, such as not
> knowing whether you've got the canonical name or not. It's one of those
> tradeoffs of convenience versus portability.
>
> The Sys::Hostname module (part of the standard perl distribution) will
> give you the hostname after which you can find out the IP address
> (assuming you have working DNS) with a gethostbyname() call.
>
> use Socket;
> use Sys::Hostname;
> my $host = hostname();
> my $addr = inet_ntoa(scalar gethostbyname($host || 'localhost'));
>
> Probably the simplest way to learn your DNS domain name is to grok it
> out of /etc/resolv.conf, at least under Unix. Of course, this assumes
> several things about your resolv.conf configuration, including that it
> exists.
>
> (We still need a good DNS domain name-learning method for non-Unix
> systems.)
Shouldn't this mention the Net::Domain module?
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 00:15:24 GMT
From: Roedy Green <my_email_is_posted_on_my_website@munged.invalid>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ
Message-Id: <nihtl19j28ue5u7k58lrir0tdfd0lf59rs@4ax.com>
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 16:36:37 +0200, "Peter T. Breuer"
<ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who
said :
>> Yes, it certainly is. However, it is also Microsoft's right as a seller
>> to refuse discounts to those who also sell competing products. You may not
It was not a discount. I was being denied the right to buy from any
wholesaler. The "deal" MS offered was that I as an independent
retailer had to by ALL my MS OS products retail if I wanted to sell
even one machines without Windows.
That would have been easily enough to put any retailer out of business
if he did not comply.
Even in retrospect, when I kick myself for abandoning my principles,
It would still be a tough decision.
1. I had eight people working for me who would have become unemployed.
2. The city would have lost one of its most ethical retailers.
3. Microsoft would STILL have won.
4. I would have had to put up taunts from people calling me crazy for
destroying my business in what they would see as a vainglorious
attempt to stop the Microsoft juggernaut.
What MS did was put me in a position where felt I had little choice
but to violate my OWN moral code of conduct. That is what has me so
pissed.
It is bad enough to be extorted from. It even worse to be forced into
a racket to extort others.
If any one here considers what MS did acceptable I am glad by their
public stance they have warned others off ever having business
dealings with them because their low standards of conduct.
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 00:17:40 GMT
From: Roedy Green <my_email_is_posted_on_my_website@munged.invalid>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ
Message-Id: <ioitl1dbplmtvlagd19ho3i4coni0g9kul@4ax.com>
On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 02:03:36 +1000, Steven D'Aprano
<steve@REMOVETHIScyber.com.au> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted
someone who said :
>You don't care that because of Microsoft's neglect, there are millions of
>zombie PCs running their sub-standard OS across the world, sending
>hundreds of millions of spam emails?
Of course he cares. He is a shill. He licks that hand that feeds him.
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 00:21:21 GMT
From: Roedy Green <my_email_is_posted_on_my_website@munged.invalid>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ
Message-Id: <utitl119do31ns6e4mv3oijaqpm6donhlm@4ax.com>
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:49:46 -0400, Brian Utterback
<brian.utterback@sun.removeme.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted
someone who said :
> Some of those steps were illegal by U.S.
>law.
There is also the matter of the Bush administration interfering in the
DOJ prosecution of Microsoft first thing when they got elected. Can
you smell corruption?
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 17:58:27 -0700
From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ
Message-Id: <djmkbj$og4$1@nntp.webmaster.com>
"Roedy Green" <my_email_is_posted_on_my_website@munged.invalid> wrote in
message news:ioitl1dbplmtvlagd19ho3i4coni0g9kul@4ax.com...
> Of course he cares. He is a shill. He licks that hand that feeds him.
In an indirect sense. The company I work for does get a lot of sales
because we are "anyone but Microsoft". So we actually profit from people's
dislike of Microsoft's products. FWIW, I do think most Microsoft products
are utter crap with one exception -- in a sufficiently controlled situation,
the product can be demonstrated to be able to do what most people think they
want it to do.
I'm not sure whether or not the market really wants crap. It may be that
Microsoft correctly read that the mass market for software is for crap
software, just like the mass market for science television is for crap
science television. Frankly, I hope not.
It's kind of like how a PBS science special, largely free from market
forces, is generally of fairly high quality. On the other hand, a network
science special shaped largely by market forces, is likely to be about a
person who has learned how to speak with cats or the dead.
DS
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 01:20:39 +0200
From: Gunnar Hjalmarsson <noreply@gunnar.cc>
Subject: Moving data structure around better than globals?
Message-Id: <3s7t1vFm53o3U1@individual.net>
I have accepted that package globals as well as file scoped lexicals
should be avoided if possible, and hence a program I'm currently writing
does not include any globals. However, in a function main() i declare a
lexical reference $d to a data structure with things that are needed in
more than one subroutine. It includes things like
$d->{param} - hash ref to CGI parameters
$d->{user} - hash ref to certain data about the current user,
grabbed at authentication
$d->{error} - array ref to alerts to be displayed on screen
I'm passing $d around to just about all the functions, and it struck me
that this approach actually is very similar to using global variables.
So my question is: Why would this be better (if you think it is)?
--
Gunnar Hjalmarsson
Email: http://www.gunnar.cc/cgi-bin/contact.pl
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 16:51:38 -0700
From: "Mothra" <mothra@nowhereatall.com>
Subject: Re: Moving data structure around better than globals?
Message-Id: <435ecbbd$1@usenet.ugs.com>
Gunnar Hjalmarsson wrote:
> I have accepted that package globals as well as file scoped lexicals
> should be avoided if possible, and hence a program I'm currently
> writing does not include any globals.
(snipped)
I asked something similar in the past.
http://tinyurl.com/8bbel
Hope this helps
Mothra
------------------------------
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 8569
***************************************
