[26404] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 8575 Volume: 10
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Thu Oct 27 03:05:35 2005
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 00:05:06 -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 Thu, 27 Oct 2005 Volume: 10 Number: 8575
Today's topics:
FAQ 4.3 Why isn't my octal data interpreted correctly? <comdog@pair.com>
Re: getElementsByTagName, tag does not exist <matthew.garrish@sympatico.ca>
Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ <davids@webmaster.com>
Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ <davids@webmaster.com>
Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ <mscottschilling@hotmail.com>
Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ <davids@webmaster.com>
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>
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 04:03:01 +0000 (UTC)
From: PerlFAQ Server <comdog@pair.com>
Subject: FAQ 4.3 Why isn't my octal data interpreted correctly?
Message-Id: <djpjhl$fmv$1@reader2.panix.com>
This message is one of several periodic postings to comp.lang.perl.misc
intended to make it easier for perl programmers to find answers to
common questions. The core of this message represents an excerpt
from the documentation provided with Perl.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
4.3: Why isn't my octal data interpreted correctly?
Perl only understands octal and hex numbers as such when they occur as
literals in your program. Octal literals in perl must start with a
leading "0" and hexadecimal literals must start with a leading "0x". If
they are read in from somewhere and assigned, no automatic conversion
takes place. You must explicitly use oct() or hex() if you want the
values converted to decimal. oct() interprets hex ("0x350"), octal
("0350" or even without the leading "0", like "377") and binary
("0b1010") numbers, while hex() only converts hexadecimal ones, with or
without a leading "0x", like "0x255", "3A", "ff", or "deadbeef". The
inverse mapping from decimal to octal can be done with either the "%o"
or "%O" sprintf() formats.
This problem shows up most often when people try using chmod(), mkdir(),
umask(), or sysopen(), which by widespread tradition typically take
permissions in octal.
chmod(644, $file); # WRONG
chmod(0644, $file); # right
Note the mistake in the first line was specifying the decimal literal
644, rather than the intended octal literal 0644. The problem can be
seen with:
printf("%#o",644); # prints 01204
Surely you had not intended "chmod(01204, $file);" - did you? If you
want to use numeric literals as arguments to chmod() et al. then please
try to express them as octal constants, that is with a leading zero and
with the following digits restricted to the set 0..7.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Documents such as this have been called "Answers to Frequently
Asked Questions" or FAQ for short. They represent an important
part of the Usenet tradition. They serve to reduce the volume of
redundant traffic on a news group by providing quality answers to
questions that keep coming up.
If you are some how irritated by seeing these postings you are free
to ignore them or add the sender to your killfile. If you find
errors or other problems with these postings please send corrections
or comments to the posting email address or to the maintainers as
directed in the perlfaq manual page.
Note that the FAQ text posted by this server may have been modified
from that distributed in the stable Perl release. It may have been
edited to reflect the additions, changes and corrections provided
by respondents, reviewers, and critics to previous postings of
these FAQ. Complete text of these FAQ are available on request.
The perlfaq manual page contains the following copyright notice.
AUTHOR AND COPYRIGHT
Copyright (c) 1997-2002 Tom Christiansen and Nathan
Torkington, and other contributors as noted. All rights
reserved.
This posting is provided in the hope that it will be useful but
does not represent a commitment or contract of any kind on the part
of the contributers, authors or their agents.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 22:04:56 -0400
From: "Matt Garrish" <matthew.garrish@sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: getElementsByTagName, tag does not exist
Message-Id: <8BW7f.7122$ki7.438216@news20.bellglobal.com>
<robic0@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:jr4ul15rtli2rsnnfg3k3lgddnm4uu0r4f@4ax.com...
>
> Actually, DOM is exponentionaly irrelavent in modern xml parsing.
> Its use is fadinding like an old 59 Buick in 1965.
>
I get the impression you just like to hear yourself talk, so I'm not even
going to bother arguing this. I would suggest in the future you not get
carried away by the latest fad technology you just googled.
Matt
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 19:50:07 -0700
From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ
Message-Id: <djpf90$pbm$1@nntp.webmaster.com>
Roedy Green wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 16:53:07 -0700, "David Schwartz"
> <davids@webmaster.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who
> said :
>> Umm, it's not a judgment. Microsoft said you can sell Windows and
>> other operating systems, but there will be a charge for every
>> machine you sell without Windows -- if you want to be able to buy
>> Windows wholesale. Someone could comply with this by not selling any
>> other operating systems at all and never pay the fee. Therefore,
>> this is a lesser restriction than saying you can only sell Windows
>> wholesale if you don't sell or offer any competing systems. If I
>> have the right to say you can't use my car at all, I have the lesser
>> right to impose the lesser restriction that you can only use my car
>> if you pay me $10.
> It makes a big difference that MS has a monopoly.
See my other response to this specific argument.
> If I open an washing machine store and Maytag says, "we only sell
> wholesale to you if you agree to sell our brand exclusively."
>
> What Microsoft did is different for three reasons:
>
> 1. the Maytag agreement made up front, not imposed to shut down a
> business who has never signed a prior exclusivity contract.
The Microsoft agreement is also up front. It's not "imposed" in any
sense except that it's one of the conditions for buying Windows wholesale.
> 2. The appliance store has lots of other brands to sell. In my case,
> failing to comply with MS's illegal and immoral demand would put me
> out of busness. They were forcing me into commit criminal acts or lose
> my business.
In other words, what Microsoft had to offer you was of such value that
you'd have no customers without it. To put it another way, those are
Microsoft's customers because it's your ability to sell Microsoft products
that makes your business.
> 3. Maytag makes the machines. In the computer instance, we at CMP
> custom build the computers. Microsoft have no business telling me what
> to do when they supplied only one component. I could not even sell a
> BARE computer.
The "one component" is what makes the product you're selling. It's
"Windows PCs" that people are buying and it's the look and feel of a
"Windows PC" that makes it what it is.
There is no different to Microsoft beween a bare computer and one
preloaded with Linux or FreeBSD. One can quickly be converted to other with
minimal cost of effort. In the market, bare PCs really do compete with
Windows PCs.
DS
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 19:50:40 -0700
From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ
Message-Id: <djpfa0$pbn$1@nntp.webmaster.com>
Roedy Green wrote:
> On 26 Oct 2005 18:05:45 +0200, Tor Iver Wilhelmsen
> <jadedgamer@hotmail.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone
> who said :
>>> IBM seems to have had a history of squeezing out competition in the
>>> same way Microsoft has, if I recall correctly.
>> ... and were told not to by a court. Which is the whole reason for
>> the existence of IBM clones, whether PCs or mainframes.
> Back in the early days, IBM was just as bad as MS. Competition and
> some smackdown by the DOJ, have made them much better behaved.
And opened the door for Microsoft.
DS
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 05:18:59 GMT
From: "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ
Message-Id: <7rZ7f.6819$dO2.5775@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>
"David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com> wrote in message
news:djpf90$pbm$1@nntp.webmaster.com...
>
> There is no different to Microsoft beween a bare computer and one
> preloaded with Linux or FreeBSD. One can quickly be converted to other
> with minimal cost of effort. In the market, bare PCs really do compete
> with Windows PCs.
There's a huge difference to the non-techy consumer. One of the buggest
reasons Linux has had a reputation of being harder to use than Windows was
the fact that Linux had to be installed, while Windows just booted up.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 22:46:33 -0700
From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ
Message-Id: <djppjp$t5s$1@nntp.webmaster.com>
Mike Schilling wrote:
> "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com> wrote in message
> news:djpf90$pbm$1@nntp.webmaster.com...
>> There is no different to Microsoft beween a bare computer and one
>> preloaded with Linux or FreeBSD. One can quickly be converted to
>> other with minimal cost of effort. In the market, bare PCs really do
>> compete with Windows PCs.
> There's a huge difference to the non-techy consumer. One of the
> buggest reasons Linux has had a reputation of being harder to use
> than Windows was the fact that Linux had to be installed, while
> Windows just booted up.
Is that really true? I mean, I remember distributions of Linux that you
could just stick in the CD, boot from CD, and you were up in minutes.
Installing was as simple as pushing the 'install to hard drive' button.
I think one of the biggest reasons Linux has a reputation of being
harder to use than Windows is that it *is* harder to use. However, the
payoff is that when a Linux machine breaks, you can fix it. When a Windows
machine breaks, you pretty much have to reinstall. And Windows machines
break in this way more often because it's much harder to limit what a user
or program can do.
Linux, for example, would be easier to use if it had no permissions
checks and always ran everything as root. However, it doesn't do this the
way Windows does (or more accurately, the way Windows users typically do),
because that's just not the Linux way.
I'm trying to think of a good analogy to make my point clearer, but I
can't.
IMO, a person who doesn't find installing Linux to be easy wouldn't be
able to use a Linux desktop (or do much with a Linux server either for that
matter). But I could be out of date, I haven't really tried to use the more
recent Linux desktop builds as desktops. But, IMO, that was certainly true
in the time frame we're talking about.
DS
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 06:11:24 GMT
From: Roedy Green <my_email_is_posted_on_my_website@munged.invalid>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ
Message-Id: <epr0m1lq39pvrv2b2c9eslj4vitm55ffkj@4ax.com>
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 02:28:46 +0200, "Peter T. Breuer"
<ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who
said :
>I'm a bit curious about this. If I were a business person, I would
>simply have created two busineses (two accounts, etc.). One business
>sells only machines with MS on and pays the MS tax on all its machines.
>One business sells only machines without MS on and pays the MS tax on
>none of its machines.
>
>What's up with that?
Try the same thing to deal with a Mafia extortion racket.
We are not talking about legal agreements. We are talking junior Mafia
style enforcement.
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 06:12:24 GMT
From: Roedy Green <my_email_is_posted_on_my_website@munged.invalid>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ
Message-Id: <ssr0m1tq3n5uksv0ltaf4edl5sttj47h7g@4ax.com>
On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 19:50:07 -0700, "David Schwartz"
<davids@webmaster.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who
said :
> The Microsoft agreement is also up front. It's not "imposed" in any
>sense except that it's one of the conditions for buying Windows wholesale.
No it was not . It was never on paper. It was not imposed until I
had been in business for at least 5 years.
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 06:15:03 GMT
From: Roedy Green <my_email_is_posted_on_my_website@munged.invalid>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ
Message-Id: <nvr0m1ld2c60kim449rrtiidenogau55ml@4ax.com>
On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 19:50:07 -0700, "David Schwartz"
<davids@webmaster.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who
said :
> There is no different to Microsoft beween a bare computer and one
>preloaded with Linux or FreeBSD. One can quickly be converted to other with
>minimal cost of effort. In the market, bare PCs really do compete with
>Windows PCs.
You think it is OK to force someone into a choice of committing a
criminal act with the alternative of losing their established business
and having to put 8 employees out of work. What religion do you belong
to?
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching.
------------------------------
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 8575
***************************************
