[29719] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 963 Volume: 11
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Mon Oct 22 00:09:40 2007
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 21:09:05 -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 Sun, 21 Oct 2007 Volume: 11 Number: 963
Today's topics:
Re: cgi_bin <noreply@gunnar.cc>
Re: cgi_bin <elvis-85473@notatla.org.uk>
Data::Dumper and UTF-8 <fusionfive@comhem.se>
Re: Data::Dumper and UTF-8 <no@email.com>
Re: Distributed RVS, Darcs, tech love <slobodan.blazeski@gmail.com>
Re: Distributed RVS, Darcs, tech love <llothar@web.de>
Re: Distributed RVS, Darcs, tech love <lew@lewscanon.com>
Re: Distributed RVS, Darcs, tech love <angrybaldguy@gmail.com>
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 23:13:28 +0200
From: Gunnar Hjalmarsson <noreply@gunnar.cc>
Subject: Re: cgi_bin
Message-Id: <5o1tnrFkpgh4U1@mid.individual.net>
Charlton Wilbur wrote:
>>>>>> "NW" == Nick Wedd <nick@maproom.co.uk> writes:
>
> NW> Obviously I have the ability to keep all my executables in one
> NW> directory if I want to - but I don't see how this helps. Can
> NW> you explain?
<snip>
> (Your inability to find such a forum that will answer your question is
> not justification for asking it here, either.)
Even if we don't know anything about the OPs ability in that respect,
I'd say that the lack of a more appropriate Usenet group _does_ justify
him asking it here.
Quoted from "perldoc -q usenet":
"Use comp.lang.perl.misc for topics which do not have a more-appropriate
specific group."
--
Gunnar Hjalmarsson
Email: http://www.gunnar.cc/cgi-bin/contact.pl
------------------------------
Date: 22 Oct 2007 00:04:59 GMT
From: all mail refused <elvis-85473@notatla.org.uk>
Subject: Re: cgi_bin
Message-Id: <slrnfhnq4v.rlp.elvis-85473@notatla.org.uk>
Suppose that your webserver is organised so that several people write
ordinary static pages under directories they own but that one person is
responsible for the webserver as a whole. (This might not be an unusual
situation and certainly applies to my own server.)
Forcing all CGIs to be in the cgi-bin directory means that a new CGI
(in a directory writable only by root) has to pass at least some
quality assessment before installation.
Also it's just good organisation to keep related things together
and a directory of CGIs may make a useful unit to keep together
in a version control system.
--
Elvis Notargiacomo master AT barefaced DOT cheek
http://www.notatla.org.uk/goen/
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 21:27:07 GMT
From: August Karlstrom <fusionfive@comhem.se>
Subject: Data::Dumper and UTF-8
Message-Id: <LuPSi.11867$ZA.7851@newsb.telia.net>
Hi,
I'm trying to make Dumper display an UTF-8 string but I can't get it to
work:
$ cat test.pl
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use strict;
use Data::Dumper;
use utf8;
binmode(STDOUT, ":utf8");
my $s = "\x{263a}";
print "$s\n";
print Dumper($s);
print Dumper("☺");
$ ./test.pl
☺
$VAR1 = "\x{263a}";
$VAR1 = "\x{263a}";
Any clues?
Regards,
August
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 22:32:34 +0100
From: Brian Wakem <no@email.com>
Subject: Re: Data::Dumper and UTF-8
Message-Id: <5o1uriFks3phU1@mid.individual.net>
August Karlstrom wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to make Dumper display an UTF-8 string but I can't get it to
> work:
>
> $ cat test.pl
> #!/usr/bin/perl -w
>
> use strict;
> use Data::Dumper;
> use utf8;
>
> binmode(STDOUT, ":utf8");
>
> my $s = "\x{263a}";
>
> print "$s\n";
> print Dumper($s);
> print Dumper("?");
>
> $ ./test.pl
> ?
> $VAR1 = "\x{263a}";
> $VAR1 = "\x{263a}";
>
> Any clues?
What version of Perl?
From http://search.cpan.org/~ilyam/Data-Dumper-2.121/Dumper.pm
"Pure Perl version of Data::Dumper escapes UTF-8 strings correctly only in
Perl 5.8.0 and later."
--
Brian Wakem
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 11:11:08 -0700
From: Slobodan Blazeski <slobodan.blazeski@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Distributed RVS, Darcs, tech love
Message-Id: <1192990268.185865.34550@t8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>
On Oct 20, 6:20 pm, Daniel Pitts <googlegrou...@coloraura.com> wrote:
> On Oct 20, 2:04 pm, llothar <llot...@web.de> wrote:
>
> > > I love math. I respect Math. I'm nothing but a menial servant to
> > > Mathematics.
>
> > Programming and use cases are not maths. Many mathematics are
> > the worst programmers i've seen because they want to solve things and
> > much more often you just need heuristics. Once they are into exact
> > world they loose there capability to see the factor of relevance in
> > algorithms.
>
> > And they almost never match the mental model that the average
> > user has about a problem.
>
> I read somewhere that for large primes, using Fermat's Little Theorem
> test is *good enough* for engineers because the chances of it being
> wrong are less likely than a cosmic particle hitting your CPU at the
> exact instant to cause a failure of the same sort. This is the
> primary difference between engineers and mathematicians.
Carmichael number are the ones who are making the problem , but they
are very rare.
There are 1,401,644 Carmichael numbers between 1 and 1018
(approximately one in 700 billion numbers.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmichael_number If you want to be sure
use Miller-Rabin test.
Slobodan Blazeski
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 13:28:26 -0700
From: llothar <llothar@web.de>
Subject: Re: Distributed RVS, Darcs, tech love
Message-Id: <1192998506.251127.172530@v29g2000prd.googlegroups.com>
On 21 Okt., 22:45, Lew <l...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
> Evidence is that TeX development is dead.
Exactly and Knuths only contribution to software development was the
theory of
"literate" programming. As i said for me algorithms are not software
development,
this is programming in the small (something left for coding apes), not
programming
in the large. There are no problems anymore with programming the
small, sure you
can try to develop Judy Arrays or another more optimized sorting
algorithm, but
this has no real world effect. It is theoretical computer science -
well a few
people seem to like this.
And as an evidence that this theory works ("literate" programming) -
there is no
easy prove about efficient workflow - was his TeX program where only
some parts
are handled like this. But drawing an conclusion from a "developement
dead"
project to other "in development" projects is just sorry: fucking
stupid.
Everythink in the real world says that "literate" programming is not
useable.
Sure if you are an academic guy you can do endless post-mortem
analysis you might
find this amazing but it is just as worthless for the real world as a
guy building
a copy of the Eiffel tower from burned matches - a pure hobby.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 18:11:57 -0400
From: Lew <lew@lewscanon.com>
Subject: Re: Distributed RVS, Darcs, tech love
Message-Id: <f6KdnYc5tvQwU4banZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@comcast.com>
llothar wrote:
> On 21 Okt., 22:45, Lew <l...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
>
>> Evidence is that TeX development is dead.
>
> Exactly and Knuths only contribution to software development was the
> theory of
> "literate" programming. As i said for me algorithms are not software
> development,
> this is programming in the small (something left for coding apes), not
> programming
> in the large. There are no problems anymore with programming the
> small, sure you
> can try to develop Judy Arrays or another more optimized sorting
> algorithm, but
> this has no real world effect. It is theoretical computer science -
> well a few
> people seem to like this.
>
> And as an evidence that this theory works ("literate" programming) -
> there is no
> easy prove about efficient workflow - was his TeX program where only
> some parts
> are handled like this. But drawing an conclusion from a "developement
> dead"
> project to other "in development" projects is just sorry: fucking
> stupid.
No, I conclude that literate programming works from the prevalence of tools
like Javadoc and Doxygen, and the Sun and MS coding standards documents. I
see the direct benefits in my own work every day.
Proposing a straw-man argument then knocking it down with mere purple prose
like "just sorry: [sic] fucking stupid" is, sorry, just fucking stupid. See?
No logic there at all. Thus proving that there's no logic there at all.
> Everythink in the real world says that "literate" programming is not
> useable.
Rrr? "Everythink" does, eh? Maybe what the world needs instead is literate
programmers, then.
Cite some specifics, please? And remember, when you say "everything" that
even one counter-example disproves.
There is evidence that aspects of "literate" programming do work. Besides,
that a theory is wrong is part of science, not a denigration of the scientist.
Even a wrong theory, like Newtonian mechanics, advances the science (e.g.,
physics) and is evidence that the scientist (Isaac Newton) is a genius. Like
Donald Knuth.
> Sure if you are an academic guy you can do endless post-mortem
> analysis you might
> find this amazing but it is just as worthless for the real world as a
> guy building
> a copy of the Eiffel tower from burned matches - a pure hobby.
So you say, again with just rhetoric and complete lack of evidence or argument
to support the outrageous assertion. Many people, myself included, have seen
your so-called "real world" benefit significantly from academic results.
Object-oriented programming is an example. The fertilization works both ways;
check out how the science of computer graphics expanded thanks to LucasFilms.
Try using reason, logic and evidence for your points instead of merely
shouting obscenities, hm?
--
Lew
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 15:50:58 -0700
From: Owen Jacobson <angrybaldguy@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Distributed RVS, Darcs, tech love
Message-Id: <1193007058.180051.137000@t8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>
On Oct 21, 3:11 pm, Lew <l...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
> Try using reason, logic and evidence for your points instead of merely
> shouting obscenities, hm?
You're expecting logic from someone who asserts that
> llothar wrote:
> > only contribution to software development was the theory of
> > "literate" programming.
Good luck, mate.
-o
------------------------------
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 963
**************************************
