[6648] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 273 Volume: 8
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Thu Apr 10 18:17:32 1997
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 97 15:00:18 -0700
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, 10 Apr 1997 Volume: 8 Number: 273
Today's topics:
Can we create an executable of perl program pan.dhanwada@teldta.com
Re: Help Me Please! (Jason Bodnar)
Help on integer segmenting into an Array <leonstep@cedep.com>
Re: Holy Wars! (was: Perl vs C++, Unix vx MS, etc) (Digital Psychosis)
One for the Win 32 Perl and NT Gods <mike.dudziak@stoner.com>
perl5-sfio / fcgi problem. <spencer@umich.edu>
put data from web in a file <bchrist@cme.nist.gov>
Re: Reply to Ousterhout's reply (was Re: Ousterhout and <wclodius@lanl.gov>
Re: Reply to Ousterhout's reply (was Re: Ousterhout and (Steve Simmons)
Re: Reply to Ousterhout's reply (was Re: Ousterhout and <monnier+comp.lang.functional@tequila.cs.yale.edu>
Re: Reply to Ousterhout's reply (was Re: Ousterhout and <brobbins@pls.com>
Re: Simple array question by newbie... <leonstep@cedep.com>
Re: Trouble t with a 2D array! <gnat@elara.frii.com>
Ugly Versus Elegant (Was: Reply to Ousterhout's reply) <thant@acm.org>
Re: what regexps work? <jhi@alpha.hut.fi>
Re: Who makes more $$ - Windows vs. Unix programmers? (Kaz Kylheku)
Re: Who makes more $$ - Windows vs. Unix programmers? <jhi@alpha.hut.fi>
Would like to test cgi-scripts offline. (Joe Wickremasinghe)
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 8 Mar 97) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 10 Apr 1997 20:45:14 GMT
From: pan.dhanwada@teldta.com
Subject: Can we create an executable of perl program
Message-Id: <5ijjgq$juo@news2.tds.net>
I am calling a perl program using a system command of c
for example
main()
{
system('x.pl');
}
Here the problem is as the perl program is called thousands of times the
system is getting slowed down. The main reason for the slow down is as
perl program is an interpreter not an executable.
Is there any facility of creating an executable of a perl program.
If anybody knows more about this please email me
pan.dhanwada@teldta.com
pandu
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 19:06:42 GMT
From: jason@cimedia.com (Jason Bodnar)
Subject: Re: Help Me Please!
Message-Id: <334d3a1c.8108955@news.onr.com>
"Yohan" <giorgio@superlink.net> wrote:
>I am tyring to write this word interpreter game in Javascript and it just
>isn't
>providing me with the functions I need.
>
>Can any Perl Guru out there help me?
The Perl Guru's are good, but what makes you think they all know
Javascript? You're better of in comp.lang.javascript.
--
Jason C. Bodnar
jason@cimedia.com
Internet Programmer
Cox Interactive Media
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 15:41:01 -0700
From: Leon Stepanian <leonstep@cedep.com>
Subject: Help on integer segmenting into an Array
Message-Id: <334D6C7C.54A9@cedep.com>
Hi there:
Here's the problem.
$hold could have any value from 1 - 4 digits long such as:
8 or
16 or
134 or
2567
I have to get integer values held in $hold into an array under their
seperate digits such as:
for for for for
8 16 134 2567
@array[0] 0 0 0 2
@array[1] 0 0 1 5
@array[2] 0 1 3 6
@array[3] 8 6 4 7
If anyone can help me on this, I would greatly appreciate.
Leon Stepanian
------------------------------
Date: 10 Apr 1997 21:45:39 GMT
From: omard@pixmap.seas.upenn.edu (Digital Psychosis)
Subject: Re: Holy Wars! (was: Perl vs C++, Unix vx MS, etc)
Message-Id: <5ijn23$73m@netnews.upenn.edu>
Jason C Austin (jason@quake.cs.odu.edu) wrote:
: Okay, I've made a new resolution; no more getting sucked into
: holy wars! There's just too much lost information in a news post and
: it just goes around in circles.
: I have learned a bit reading through them. People tend to
: promote what they know and dislike what they never learned completely.
: If you don't know what polymorphism, a virtual constructor, and
: multiple inheritance is or can't use them effectively, you can't argue
: for or against C++. If you can't write a decent regex or type a $
: without looking at the keyboard, you can't argue for or against perl.
: Unix is better than Windows in some applications and Windows is better
: that Unix in others. Why argue and block out all the real questions?
name one thing windows is better thanunix in?
omard
: --
: Jason C. Austin
: austin@visi.net
--
Never take a strangers advice, Never let a friend fool you twice,
Never be the first to believe, never be the last to deceive...
____________The City of Suffering_____________ omard@eniac.seas.upenn.edu
http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~omard/welcome.shtml shade@resurrection.com
------------------------------
Date: 10 Apr 1997 19:35:31 GMT
From: Mike Dudziak <mike.dudziak@stoner.com>
Subject: One for the Win 32 Perl and NT Gods
Message-Id: <5ijfe3$nc9@frontier.stoner.com>
I have this question on 5 or 6 different news groups for
little over a month with no answer so I will ask again using
a better example.
I edit NT 3.51 registry enviroment variables using a perl script,
the problem is that the new values dont take immediate effect.
When I click on the 'System' icon from the Control Panel I see
the new updated values but they do not take effect until
I click on 'OK' within the window.
For example I can change the registry value for 'wallpaper' type
with a perl script but Win NT doesnt immediately change the wallpaper
on my screen. So I have to click on the 'control panel' icon
then click on the 'desktop' icon,(when I get this far I see that the
value in the wallpaper box is changed to the updated value changed by
the perl script). It's only after I click on 'OK' that Win NT changes
the wallpaper on my screen.
I need a way for the new registry values to take immediate effect
after the Perl Script changes them.
Any Suggestions??
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 17:21:19 -0400
From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer@umich.edu>
Subject: perl5-sfio / fcgi problem.
Message-Id: <334D59CF.1EC8@umich.edu>
System specifics are at the end.
The symptom: fcgi_accept returns an error: "protocol error", the client
connection
hangs waiting for a response. This only happens when more than one copy
of the
fcgi process is running (i.e., -processes 2, but not with -processes 1).
A test script ("trivial.fcg"):
use FCGI;
main: {
while (each(%ENV)) {} # Workaround accept bug.
while(FCGI::accept() >= 0) {
open(ERR, ">>trivial.log");
printf(ERR "Process %d accept\n", $$);
close(ERR);
print <<EOF;
Content-type: text/html
It's working now.
EOF
print `date`;
} # end of Fast CGI loop
open(ERR, ">>trivial.log");
printf(ERR "Process %d error %s\n", $$, $!);
close(ERR);
} # END: main
The AppClass line:
AppClass /l/httpd/mirror/fcgi-bin/trivial.fcg -processes 2
tail -f error_log intermixed with tail -f trivial.log:
[Thu Apr 10 17:01:09 1997] Server configured -- resuming normal
operations
Process 9329 error Protocol error
[Thu Apr 10 17:01:11 1997] mod_fastcgi:
/l/httpd/mirror/fcgi-bin/trivial.fcg pid 9329 terminated by calling exit
with status = 0.
[Thu Apr 10 17:01:13 1997] mod_fastcgi:
/l/httpd/mirror/fcgi-bin/trivial.fcg restarted with pid 9337.
% netstat -f unix -v
Active UNIX domain sockets
Address Type Vnode Conn Addr
502f1778 stream-ord 0 5076f788
/l/httpd/mirror/fcgi-ipc/OM_WS_4.8964
5076f788 stream-ord 0 502f1778
5076f388 stream-ord 6559057 0
/l/httpd/mirror/fcgi-ipc/OM_WS_4.8964
Running perl under dbx determines that the (C-language) accept() call is
failing with
an error code corresponding to "protocol error".
Any ideas? Any help?
Thanks.
Version information:
% uname -a
SunOS index.umdl.umich.edu 5.5.1 Generic_103640-01 sun4u sparc
SUNW,Ultra-2
% /l/p5sf/bin/perl -version
This is perl, version 5.003_95
Apache Server Information
Server Settings, fastcgi_module, info_module, status_module,
config_log_module,
action_module, imap_module, asis_module, env_module, alias_module,
userdir_module,
cgi_module, dir_module, includes_module, negotiation_module,
auth_module, access_module,
mime_module, core_module
Server Version: Apache/1.1.1-3 [IP-range]/0.1 FastCGI/1.4
API Version: 19960526
Run Mode: standalone
Daemons: start: 5 min idle: 5 max idle: 10 max: 150
Max Requests: per child: 30 per connection: 16
Module Name: fastcgi_module
Content-types affected: application/x-httpd-fcgi , fastcgi-script
Module Groups: none
Module Configuration Commands:
FastCgiIpcDir -
AppClass -
ExternalAppClass -
Current Configuration:
httpd.conf
FastCgiIpcDir /l/httpd/mirror/fcgi-ipc
srm.conf
AppClass /l/httpd/mirror/fcgi-bin/trivial.fcg -processes 2
--
=Spencer W. Thomas | School of Information, 301 Hatcher North
JSTOR / UMDL | Univ of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1205
spencer@umich.edu | 313-764-5099, FAX 313-764-2475
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 16:49:07 -0400
From: Bochenek Christophe <bchrist@cme.nist.gov>
Subject: put data from web in a file
Message-Id: <334D5243.2781E494@cme.nist.gov>
Hi,
I have managed to make:
- One CGI program which reads 2 numbers from an entry box (HTML program)
on netscape, and prints the data.
- one CGI program which opens a file and write a message in this file.
Now I would like to read the 2 numbers on netscape, and write them in
a file. But, when I push on validate, a message appears:"document
contains no data". My program:
#! /usr/local/bin/perl
print "Content-type: text/html\n\n";
$donnee=<stdin>;
open(FILEHANDLE,">filea");
print FILEHANDLE "$donnee";
close FILEHANDLE;
If I add: print($donnee),"\n"; before openning the file, the result is
written on the screen, but not in the file...
Christophe
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 10:28:30 -0600
From: William Clodius <wclodius@lanl.gov>
Subject: Re: Reply to Ousterhout's reply (was Re: Ousterhout and Tcl ...)
Message-Id: <334D152E.500F@lanl.gov>
Douglas Seay wrote:
>
> <snip> This m ight be
> ancient history, but was there a formal specification of COBOL, FORTRAN
> or APL before the first implementation?]
Define "formal" definition. Many of the "formal" techniques, BNF, VDM,
Z, etc., were not available at that time, but even now only BNF or EBNF
can really be considered to be commonly used for the definition of
languages. As BNF and EBNF only allow for the definition of the context
free syntax and languages require a context dependent semantics very few
languages have a true "formal" specification. I suspect your question
"was there a formal specification of ..." really whould be posed as "but
was there a written specification in sufficient detail to serve as a
language definition of ..."
Cobol was defined in detail by a committee (CODASYL? 1960) well before
the first implementation. (61 or 62) I suspect that almost everyone
would consider it as having had a written language definition before its
implementation.
A significant fraction of what became APL was defined in Iverson's text,
"A Programming Language" (1961?) well before the first implementation,
(1964?) but would probably be best described as defined in terms of its
initial implementation.
Fortran underwent a significant evolution between Backus's initial
proposal (1953) and its release (1956) and so its implementation served
as its initial definition.
> <snip>
--
William B. Clodius Phone: (505)-665-9370
Los Alamos Nat. Lab., NIS-2 FAX: (505)-667-3815
PO Box 1663, MS-C323 Group office: (505)-667-5776
Los Alamos, NM 87545 Email: wclodius@lanl.gov
------------------------------
Date: 10 Apr 1997 20:04:14 GMT
From: scs@iti.org (Steve Simmons)
Subject: Re: Reply to Ousterhout's reply (was Re: Ousterhout and Tcl ...)
Message-Id: <5ijh3u$qsn$1@hawk.branch.com>
"M. Prasad" <prasadm@not4u.polaroid.com> writes:
>Lisp is rather nice, but it is the evangelists/Lisp-marketeers
>many of us could do without.
Lisp has suffered (as has UNIX) by being grossly oversold by it's
proponents. On close examination, the proponents of both have confused
the environment (libraries, debuggers, UIs, rich set of tools and
utilities) with the thing itself. This was brought home quite
forcefully when, after incessant badgering from some lispaholics who
refused to give up their (admittedly very nice) TI lisp machines, I
built and installed lisp on UNIX for them. They wouldn't use it,
because all the other things they had (which were in lisp, according to
them) weren't available under UNIX. I found their lisp machines
equally stifling, because the supposedly-portable UNIX stuff wouldn't
run on their hosts. We eventually agreed we were in love with our
environments, not the languages or OSs.
One sees this same arguement perpetuated here, as people compare how to
build a button with tk vs a button with Ptk vs a button with some OO
lisp library. None of these are accurate judgements of tcl, python or
lisp. They're about the existance of libraries and how well those
libraries are implemented. For an example, look at how closely perl/tk
interface calls resemble tcl/tk. Any GUI-handling code you write in
tcl (tk) will strongly resemble the same GUI-handling code in perl
(perl/tk). No-one would be stupid enough to argue that this makes perl
and tcl of the same value; why would one argue that difficulty in using
one library over another is an indicator of the quality of the language
in use?
[[ An aside -- yes, there are languages where it's difficult to build
good libraries. That's not my point. My point is that if you want
to talk about the relative features of various languages, talk about
the features -- not the libraries, or the debuggers, or anything
except the language itself. ]]
IMHO, in the future we're all going to be polylingual. For an example
of how to do this right, take a look at the source code for `ical' (see
<http://www.research.digital.com/SRC/personal/Sanjay_Ghemawat/ical/home.html>.
The core is written in C++, the UI is done in tcl (tk) scripts loaded
from a library. Within limits, you can change the interface without
recompiling. A classic example of knowing what tool to use for what
purpose without falling into the trap that one uses only one tool.
And for the record, I work in UNIX and program in C, lisp, tcl, perl,
sh, awk, and whatever the hell tool looks like the best fit for the
job. Bigotry is for, well, bigots.
------------------------------
Date: 10 Apr 1997 17:17:02 -0400
From: Stefan Monnier <monnier+comp.lang.functional@tequila.cs.yale.edu>
Subject: Re: Reply to Ousterhout's reply (was Re: Ousterhout and Tcl ...)
Message-Id: <5lk9mao9wx.fsf@tequila.systemsz.cs.yale.edu>
Smiljan Grmek <Smi@4mate.hr> writes:
> So now we know how to make *good* languages - like good indians?
> Seriously, languages must be designed for average, garden variety of
> programmers, not CS graduates. US DOD stated that conversion to parallel
> processing is not advisable because only 1/3 of their programmers could
> program in appropriate languages.
You confuse the difficulty of switching language-style with the difficulty of
learning that specific language-style. Functional programming has never been
proven harder to learn than C. But you might have trouble getting used to
recursion now that you've been told for years and years that "for and while"
are the way to go and that recursion is complex (which it frequently is if and
only if it is mixed with assignment).
Stefan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 17:20:28 -0400
From: Bert Robbins <brobbins@pls.com>
To: prasadm@not4u.polaroid.com
Subject: Re: Reply to Ousterhout's reply (was Re: Ousterhout and Tcl ...)
Message-Id: <334D599C.742F@pls.com>
M. Prasad wrote:
>
> cosc19z5@bayou.uh.edu wrote:
>
> > Let's see, C became popular for one reason only -- it was almost
> > mandatory for programming under Unix which was widespread (and
>
> When C became popular, the other major choices were Pascal, Fortran,
> Basic, and at some places, Lisp.
I think that a large factor that contributed to the C language
becomming so popular and being the language of choice for
development was due to the tremendous number of poeple that
were turned out by the colleges and universities that had
experience with C.
AT&T/Bell Labs, when they still owned Unix, did a good job of
giving away source code to educational institutions in the late
seventies and early eighties. The educational institutions
therefore had all of these free computers with source code
to the OS to use in teaching CS to their students. With C
being the language that came with the OS, not to mention
that a majority of the OS was written in C, the were somewhat
forced to teach C.
The smart compaines jumped on the C bandwagon, rightly or
wrongly, and started to produce software written in C due
to the large labor pool that had been schooled in C which
resulted in the new hires being productive almost immediately
rather than having to train them on the companies preferred
language.
Blasphemy Alert:
Cobol is the most widely used language with the greatest
number of lines of code and programmers. If any language
can be described as the best language, based on commercial
success, then Cobol is the winner hands down.
And don't try to through the Cobol is wordy and simplistic
argument around. If you take a good hard look at the programs
and how the are customarily written these days you will find
that the lines of code is a good measure to use to compare
how much code has been written for both languages.
Blasphemy Completed.
Long live Perl!
--
Bert Robbins
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 16:19:03 -0700
From: Leon Stepanian <leonstep@cedep.com>
Subject: Re: Simple array question by newbie...
Message-Id: <334D7567.236F@cedep.com>
Hi:
If you are trying to use $#months as an array holding data, and you need
then number of array - 1.
Instead of you code for($ptr=0;$ptr<=$#months-1;$ptr++){
try for($ptr=0;$ptr<=@months-1;$ptr++){
Hope this helps. Leon Stepanian
------------------------------
Date: 07 Apr 1997 11:12:00 -0600
From: Nathan Torkington <gnat@elara.frii.com>
Subject: Re: Trouble t with a 2D array!
Message-Id: <5qafnaycyn.fsf@elara.frii.com>
Tom Christiansen <tchrist@mox.perl.com> writes:
> Please don't say that. One just has to be aware of their implementation
> for many applications. Perl *does* have 2D arrays; they just happen
> to implemented with references. To claim otherwise rings of Sophistry.
If C can be said to 'have' 2D arrays (ignore the pointers behind the
curtains), then Perl 'has' 2D arrays (with (Oh! breathe not his name,
let it sleep in the shade / Where cold and unhonour'd his relics are
laid) references).
Nat
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 14:10:29 -0700
From: Thant Tessman <thant@acm.org>
Subject: Ugly Versus Elegant (Was: Reply to Ousterhout's reply)
Message-Id: <334D5744.41C6@acm.org>
Smiljan Grmek wrote:
[...]
> Is it possible that languages with bumps and rough surfaces are somehow
> easier to remember and decode when reading than quicksilver smooth
> theoretical ones? Is it perhaps easier to interpret an ad-hoc construct
> than to reconstruct semantics from first principles?
No. The difference between elegant languages and ugly languages is that
ugly languages tend to embody incremental improvements and elegant languages
tend to embody wholesale improvements. People prefer incremental improvements
to wholesale improvements because the *perceived* cost of the former is lower.
People *think* they will be more productive using C++ over a dozen other
more productive and easier to learn languages because of the huge investment
people have already made in gathering experience using C. And as someone
has already pointed out, Tcl is only popular because people refuse to give
up C++ and Tcl happens to address some of C++'s weaknesses.
-thant
------------------------------
Date: 10 Apr 1997 22:04:15 +0300
From: Jarkko Hietaniemi <jhi@alpha.hut.fi>
Subject: Re: what regexps work?
Message-Id: <oeeg1wyhf80.fsf@alpha.hut.fi>
"James L. McGill" <fishbowl@fotd.netcomi.com> writes:
> On Wed, 9 Apr 1997, Eli the Bearded wrote:
> >Does procmail use locale for [a-z] expansions? (Perl does not.)
> According to Tom Christiansen and Jeffrey Friedl, it does.
> How did you determine that it does not?
> Perl uses whatever libc uses to determine its character classes.
> \w is magic for [a-zA-Z_]
This is true. Perl does do locales for \w. For [a-z], I doubt nobody
does simply because the whole range notation is pretty broken and
useless, by definition. One _could_ grandfather [a-z] to magically
mean 'all the alphabetics' -- but why bother? POSIX defines the
[:alpha:] notation which does do locales.
--
$jhi++; # Jarkko Hietaniemi <URL:http://www.iki.fi/~jhi/>
# To each is given a bag of tools, A shapeless mass, and a book of rules,
# And each must make, ere life is flown, A stumbling-block or stepping-stone.
------------------------------
Date: 10 Apr 1997 19:49:44 GMT
From: kaz@vision.crest.nt.com (Kaz Kylheku)
Subject: Re: Who makes more $$ - Windows vs. Unix programmers?
Message-Id: <5ijg8o$ajb@bcrkh13.bnr.ca>
In article <5ijdoe$oo8@mtinsc03.worldnet.att.net>,
Craig Franck <clfranck@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>It is obvious that Linux is a pun on UNIX, and the down casing
>of the other letters looks more modern and reflective of what
>the name really is: UNIX + Linus = Linux. (But maybe I am just
>spreading more misinformation myself!)
It's not really a pun, since it's not intended to be funny and doesn't
carry a double entendre. The letters 'UX' have been used in the names of other
operating systems: DG/UX, HP-UX, A/UX. Then there are names that use IX or X:
IRIX, AIX, Domain/IX, ESIX, Minix, ...
So Linux can be seen as a sensible way of writing LIN/UX! :)
------------------------------
Date: 10 Apr 1997 21:24:38 +0300
From: Jarkko Hietaniemi <jhi@alpha.hut.fi>
Subject: Re: Who makes more $$ - Windows vs. Unix programmers?
Message-Id: <oeeg1wy91nd.fsf@alpha.hut.fi>
:|> At the time the statement was made I am sure it was true.
:|> Things change fast in the computer industry...
:
: The statement in question concerns an _historical_ fact -- ...
: Its truth or falsity does not evolve over time.
You obviously have never met Microsoft marketing?
--
$jhi++; # Jarkko Hietaniemi <URL:http://www.iki.fi/~jhi/>
# To each is given a bag of tools, A shapeless mass, and a book of rules,
# And each must make, ere life is flown, A stumbling-block or stepping-stone.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 21:46:08 GMT
From: exet0068@sable.ox.ac.uk (Joe Wickremasinghe)
Subject: Would like to test cgi-scripts offline.
Message-Id: <334cff1c.296603@news.ox.ac.uk>
Rather than log on to my ISP and waste money while I try to figure out
cg scripting, is there any way I can run perl programs. , as cgi
scripts, while offline? I would imagine this may involve setting up my
computer as a web server, even though no-one else is going to connect
to it. I am thinking of installing Linux - perhaps it would be easier
under this than Win95?
Thanks,
Joe Wickremasinghe
------------------------------
Date: 8 Mar 97 21:33:47 GMT (Last modified)
From: Perl-Request@ruby.oce.orst.edu (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
Subject: Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 8 Mar 97)
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.
To submit articles to comp.lang.perl.misc (and this Digest), send your
article to perl-users@ruby.oce.orst.edu.
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.
The Meta-FAQ, an article containing information about the FAQ, is
available by requesting "send perl-users meta-faq". The real FAQ, as it
appeared last in the newsgroup, can be retrieved with the request "send
perl-users FAQ". Due to their sizes, neither the Meta-FAQ nor the FAQ
are included in the digest.
The "mini-FAQ", which is an updated version of the Meta-FAQ, is
available by requesting "send perl-users mini-faq". It appears twice
weekly in the group, but is not distributed in the digest.
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 V8 Issue 273
*************************************
