[29099] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 343 Volume: 11
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Sun Apr 15 16:14:14 2007
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 13:14:08 -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 Sun, 15 Apr 2007 Volume: 11 Number: 343
Today's topics:
Re: Top Turds of comp.lang.perl.misc (2007) <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at>
Re: Top Turds of comp.lang.perl.misc (2007) <bik.mido@tiscalinet.it>
Re: Top Turds of comp.lang.perl.misc (2007) <bik.mido@tiscalinet.it>
Re: Top Turds of comp.lang.perl.misc (2007) cartercc@gmail.com
Re: Top Turds of comp.lang.perl.misc (2007) <1usa@llenroc.ude.invalid>
Re: Top Turds of comp.lang.perl.misc (2007) <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at>
Re: Top Turds of comp.lang.perl.misc (2007) <edMbj@aes-intl.com>
Re: Top Turds of comp.lang.perl.misc (2007) <edMbj@aes-intl.com>
Re: Top Turds of comp.lang.perl.misc (2007) <edMbj@aes-intl.com>
Re: Using Modules once <rs@474.at>
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 15:16:00 +0200
From: "Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at>
Subject: Re: Top Turds of comp.lang.perl.misc (2007)
Message-Id: <slrnf249cg.dtb.hjp-usenet2@zeno.hjp.at>
On 2007-04-14 17:52, Michele Dondi <bik.mido@tiscalinet.it> wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 09:19:47 -0700, Ed Jay <edMbj@aes-intl.com> wrote:
>
>>>Did schools like MIT or Stanford ever offer a "regular" course in
>>>Perl? Please enlighten me on this because I never applied to either
>>>of these schools.
>>
>>I don't know, but I have seen classes offered in javascript, Java, VB,
>>C++ and others. I would have thought that if Perl is as popular as
>>we'd like to believe, it too would be offered.
>
> As I wrote in my other post, I don't think so. Even if Perl were many
> many times more popular than it actually is. I think that it's a good
> thing people will learn how to program with Java. Then they will
> stumble upon Perl and say: whoa, so I don't have to create a whole
> class just to print "hello, world"?
I'm not sure. I learned programming with BASIC (real BASIC, with GOTO
and GOSUB and two-character variable names, not some newfangled
dialect), and while I would probably have coped with Java, the quick
sense of achievement you get from
10 print "hello, world"
is something that is important to the beginner.
I never taught perl to beginners, but I think it's a rather good
educational language: You can start with "baby perl" (as Horshack calls
it) and gradually introduce more and more advanced features (the perfect
time to introduce "use strict" and "use warnings" is when your students
can't find a mistyped variable - don't put it into their first "hello
world" program).
Also if you only know Java (and similar languages), you probably won't
appreciate perl (I know it took me some time to get used to it, and I
did know sh and awk in addition to C, Modula, Fortran, etc.). You will
dismiss it as a toy for small scripts, and not accept it as an
"industrial strength" language because it isn't compiled, doesn't do
typechecking, and isn't supported by CASE tools.
hp
--
_ | Peter J. Holzer | I know I'd be respectful of a pirate
|_|_) | Sysadmin WSR | with an emu on his shoulder.
| | | hjp@hjp.at |
__/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | -- Sam in "Freefall"
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 19:02:19 +0200
From: Michele Dondi <bik.mido@tiscalinet.it>
Subject: Re: Top Turds of comp.lang.perl.misc (2007)
Message-Id: <okm423t1ec9mt7ch7bldmuqkbl6dm0q5r9@4ax.com>
On 15 Apr 2007 07:00:35 -0400, Charlton Wilbur
<cwilbur@chromatico.net> wrote:
>To call yourself a doctor, you need several years of education,
>professional certification, and a current license. If you act as a
>doctor without all of these things, you go to jail. If you do the
>wrong thing as a doctor when you should have known otherwise, you pay
>considerable money as damages.
Well, not always. Not necessarily. Unfortunately. But point taken.
>To call yourself a lawyer, you need several years of education,
>professional certifiation, and membership in a professional legal
>association. If you act as a lawyer without all of these things, you
>are heavily fined, or you go to jail. If you do the wrong thing as a
>lawyer when you should have known otherwise, you are heavily fined, or
>you go to jail.
Well, not always. Not necessarily. Unfortunately. But point taken.
>To call yourself a computer programmer, you don't even need to be able
>to operate the computer. You can get hired and paid as a computer
>programmer with no qualification whatsoever, and you can continue in
Well, isn't this the nice part of this world? Seriously, I think it
is.
>the job regardless of skill. If you do the wrong thing as a computer
>scientist when you should have known otherwise, you get promoted to
>management and given a bigger budget.
$Quote->To('.sig');
Michele
--
{$_=pack'B8'x25,unpack'A8'x32,$a^=sub{pop^pop}->(map substr
(($a||=join'',map--$|x$_,(unpack'w',unpack'u','G^<R<Y]*YB='
.'KYU;*EVH[.FHF2W+#"\Z*5TI/ER<Z`S(G.DZZ9OX0Z')=~/./g)x2,$_,
256),7,249);s/[^\w,]/ /g;$ \=/^J/?$/:"\r";print,redo}#JAPH,
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 19:10:28 +0200
From: Michele Dondi <bik.mido@tiscalinet.it>
Subject: Re: Top Turds of comp.lang.perl.misc (2007)
Message-Id: <utm42396tra33upfcap4gvevjdqlfcok63@4ax.com>
On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 15:16:00 +0200, "Peter J. Holzer"
<hjp-usenet2@hjp.at> wrote:
>Also if you only know Java (and similar languages), you probably won't
>appreciate perl (I know it took me some time to get used to it, and I
>did know sh and awk in addition to C, Modula, Fortran, etc.). You will
>dismiss it as a toy for small scripts, and not accept it as an
>"industrial strength" language because it isn't compiled, doesn't do
>typechecking, and isn't supported by CASE tools.
We only have to be patient and wait some more. Then we will be able to
dismiss these objections. For the moment we can do:
pugs> sub postfix:<!> (Int $n) { [*] 1..$n }
undef
pugs> say 42!;
1405006117752879898543142606244511569936384000000000
Bool::True
:-)
Michele
--
{$_=pack'B8'x25,unpack'A8'x32,$a^=sub{pop^pop}->(map substr
(($a||=join'',map--$|x$_,(unpack'w',unpack'u','G^<R<Y]*YB='
.'KYU;*EVH[.FHF2W+#"\Z*5TI/ER<Z`S(G.DZZ9OX0Z')=~/./g)x2,$_,
256),7,249);s/[^\w,]/ /g;$ \=/^J/?$/:"\r";print,redo}#JAPH,
------------------------------
Date: 15 Apr 2007 10:31:22 -0700
From: cartercc@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Top Turds of comp.lang.perl.misc (2007)
Message-Id: <1176658282.707296.113010@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>
On Apr 14, 8:52 pm, Ed Jay <e...@aes-intl.com> wrote:
> Someone is likely going to get on you for 'top posting' your response.
> Usenet etiquette, tradition and logical discussion flow dictates that you
> post your response below that to which your responding, or interspersed, as
> I've done, above, to answer a specific point.
I started with usenet in the days of the rubber cushions used to
cradle a telephone handset. You paid for connection time by the
minute, it it wasn't cheap. In the days of the 9600 baud modem, you
needed to make every line count. In that environment, bottom posters
were cursed. I mean this literally. The rule was, don't repeat what
someone else has already said unless absolutely essential to
understanding. In the case of my top post, nothing anyone else said is
essential to understanding anything I said. So ... no need to bottom
post.
CC
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 18:13:53 GMT
From: "A. Sinan Unur" <1usa@llenroc.ude.invalid>
Subject: Re: Top Turds of comp.lang.perl.misc (2007)
Message-Id: <Xns991390C5D47DCasu1cornelledu@127.0.0.1>
Michele Dondi <bik.mido@tiscalinet.it> wrote in
news:utm42396tra33upfcap4gvevjdqlfcok63@4ax.com:
> On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 15:16:00 +0200, "Peter J. Holzer"
> <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at> wrote:
>
>>Also if you only know Java (and similar languages), you probably won't
>>appreciate perl (I know it took me some time to get used to it, and I
>>did know sh and awk in addition to C, Modula, Fortran, etc.). You will
>>dismiss it as a toy for small scripts, and not accept it as an
>>"industrial strength" language because it isn't compiled, doesn't do
>>typechecking, and isn't supported by CASE tools.
>
> We only have to be patient and wait some more. Then we will be able to
> dismiss these objections. For the moment we can do:
>
> pugs> sub postfix:<!> (Int $n) { [*] 1..$n }
> undef
> pugs> say 42!;
> 1405006117752879898543142606244511569936384000000000
> Bool::True
>
>:-)
:-))) indeed. I might be convinced to learn something new after all.
Sinan
--
A. Sinan Unur <1usa@llenroc.ude.invalid>
(remove .invalid and reverse each component for email address)
comp.lang.perl.misc guidelines on the WWW:
http://augustmail.com/~tadmc/clpmisc/clpmisc_guidelines.html
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 21:31:41 +0200
From: "Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at>
Subject: Re: Top Turds of comp.lang.perl.misc (2007)
Message-Id: <slrnf24vct.7pk.hjp-usenet2@zeno.hjp.at>
On 2007-04-15 17:31, cartercc@gmail.com <cartercc@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 14, 8:52 pm, Ed Jay <e...@aes-intl.com> wrote:
>> Someone is likely going to get on you for 'top posting' your
>> response.
>
> I started with usenet in the days of the rubber cushions used to
> cradle a telephone handset. You paid for connection time by the
> minute, it it wasn't cheap. In the days of the 9600 baud modem, you
> needed to make every line count. In that environment, bottom posters
> were cursed. I mean this literally. The rule was, don't repeat what
> someone else has already said unless absolutely essential to
> understanding. In the case of my top post, nothing anyone else said is
> essential to understanding anything I said. So ... no need to bottom
> post.
Bandwidth is cheap now, but human time isn't. If you quote stuff
unnecessarily, lots of people will read it and curse you because you've
wasted their time instead of taking a few seconds to trim the quoting
to the relevant parts. After some time they will stop cursing and
killfile you instead.
hp
--
_ | Peter J. Holzer | I know I'd be respectful of a pirate
|_|_) | Sysadmin WSR | with an emu on his shoulder.
| | | hjp@hjp.at |
__/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | -- Sam in "Freefall"
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 12:43:51 -0700
From: Ed Jay <edMbj@aes-intl.com>
Subject: Re: Top Turds of comp.lang.perl.misc (2007)
Message-Id: <lsv423p90itmisj88ilqk3iggeol0r7l2e@4ax.com>
cartercc@gmail.com scribed:
>On Apr 14, 8:52 pm, Ed Jay <e...@aes-intl.com> wrote:
>> Someone is likely going to get on you for 'top posting' your response.
>> Usenet etiquette, tradition and logical discussion flow dictates that you
>> post your response below that to which your responding, or interspersed, as
>> I've done, above, to answer a specific point.
>
>I started with usenet in the days of the rubber cushions used to
>cradle a telephone handset. You paid for connection time by the
>minute, it it wasn't cheap. In the days of the 9600 baud modem, you
>needed to make every line count.
You're just a kid. 9600 baud? I was around for the 110 baud audio-coupled
modems. In those days we didn't post at all. :-)
I wasn't aware that Usenet was around in the early 70's.
>In that environment, bottom posters
>were cursed. I mean this literally. The rule was, don't repeat what
>someone else has already said unless absolutely essential to
>understanding.
I spent a lot of time on bbs's, and that was the rule.
>In the case of my top post, nothing anyone else said is
>essential to understanding anything I said. So ... no need to bottom
>post.
>
--
Ed Jay (remove 'M' to respond by email)
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 12:58:34 -0700
From: Ed Jay <edMbj@aes-intl.com>
Subject: Re: Top Turds of comp.lang.perl.misc (2007)
Message-Id: <hb05231qevfv00vc1bkas6h6g6nni25jgh@4ax.com>
Charlton Wilbur scribed:
>>>>>> "EJ" == Ed Jay <edMbj@aes-intl.com> writes:
>
> EJ> As a struggling Perl newbie, I derive little encouragement to
> EJ> pursue my education from your statements. Perhaps it's time
> EJ> for me to go down a different programming path while I'm still
> EJ> embryonic.
>
>If you take Purl Gurl seriously, you ought to be encouraged to go down
>a different career path altogether.
I take anyone seriously who appears to be offering me a helping hand when I
need it.
By way of clarification I am not seeking a career path. I wish I were, but
at 65, and already possessing a doctorate in physics, I think it's time to
take it a bit easier than I have in the past. :-)
What I am doing is rewriting an application I wrote in Z80 assembly years
ago. I'm writing it as a web-based application and I chose Perl as my SS
system.
>
> EJ> Perl isn't offered in the BSc/CS curriculum? That speaks
> EJ> loudly to me. I tried to take a course in Perl at my local
> EJ> junior college, but it's not offered.
>
>That's because the educational curriculum focuses on tools that
>attempt to inculcate good programming habits or that demonstrate
>particular techniques. Perl does neither.
>
Understood.
> EJ> How profoundly rude, indeed! ...
>
>I recommend, first, that you pay attention to the Posting Guidelines,
>and pay attention to how many people who follow the Posting Guidelines
>get flamed and treated rudely compared to how many people who do not
>follow them. There's a reason they exist.
It appears to me that you are using an excuse to substitute for a reason why
it's OK to be rude. Your point is well made, but I still see no good reason
for anyone to be rude or offensive. Difference of opinion.
>
>I recommend, second, that if you intend to continue in any technical
>field, that you develop the skill to learn by yourself by studying the
>documentation. If you develop that skill, you are responsible for
>your own success; if you fail to develop that skill, you make yourself
>permanently dependent on the benevolence and donated time of others.
>In situations where neither is available in sufficient quantity --
>such as this newsgroup -- you lose out.
>
I agree with you same as I did when PG made the same observation. ;-)
--
Ed Jay (remove 'M' to respond by email)
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 13:03:28 -0700
From: Ed Jay <edMbj@aes-intl.com>
Subject: Re: Top Turds of comp.lang.perl.misc (2007)
Message-Id: <uv052312llqvucfnaurqupbvt0ctsg7suu@4ax.com>
Peter J. Holzer scribed:
>On 2007-04-14 07:34, Ed Jay <edMbj@aes-intl.com> wrote:
>> On 16 Mar, "The Count" wrote:
>>>Im a BSc4 Maths/Computer Science student and would like to find out
>>>the best way to learn programming in perl.Perl is not offered in my
>>>course but I find that it is a very popular language.I can program in
>>>Pascal,Delphi and C++...
>>
>> Perl isn't offered in the BSc/CS curriculum? That speaks loudly to me.
>
>Doesn't speak at all to me. When I was at the university, there wasn't
>a single course in the curriculum which was touted as a "language
>course". Of course you learned Modula II in the "introduction to
>programming" course and you learned C in the "systems programming"
>course for the simple reason that these were the languages which you
>had to use for the exercises, but that wasn't the actual goal of the
>course, and the choice of language certainly wasn't that the language
>should be in wide-spread use in "the industry". I don't think Modula was
>much used outside of academia at the time, while (Turbo) Pascal or Basic
>were quite popular (and I don't think there was a Basic course on the
>whole university. The electrical engineers used Pascal for their
>programming 101 course). The only language which we were "strongly
>encouraged" to learn because we "would need it" was COBOL. Never needed
>that again :-).
>
When I went to school there were no computer classes, let alone programming
courses. I remember in the early 60's being sent by my employer to UCLA for
a three-day course in 'software.'
Thank you. I appreciate your advice and as I said, I wish I were young
enough to use it all.
--
Ed Jay (remove 'M' to respond by email)
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 15:25:10 +0200
From: Robert 'phaylon' Sedlacek <rs@474.at>
Subject: Re: Using Modules once
Message-Id: <462227bf$0$23143$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
Hi Brian,
you wrote:
> I am getting the hang of some Perl approaches to situations. But one
> thing is bothering me. Perhaps this has been written about somewhere.
> Pointers appreciated.
>
> Can you do something in general with a set of perl package files to
> make it into a 'run once program' instead of installing it?
You might want to take a look at the PAR[1] distribution. It allows you
to bundle dependencies into an archive. It goes so far that you can also
include the perl interpreter and make it an executable.
HTH,
.phaylon
[1] http://search.cpan.org/dist/PAR
------------------------------
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 V11 Issue 343
**************************************
