[9063] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 2681 Volume: 8
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Fri May 22 07:13:57 1998
Date: Fri, 22 May 98 03:00:31 -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 Fri, 22 May 1998 Volume: 8 Number: 2681
Today's topics:
Re: Benchmark: pre-extending array? (Jari Aalto+mail.perl)
Re: Camel p. 541: "Prefer join()" (Jari Aalto+mail.perl)
Can we please get back on topic? <spamsux-tex@habit.com>
Re: Clearly define "free software" (Christopher Seawood)
FileMaker && Perl <rlawrie@direct.ca>
FileMaker Pro && Perl <rlawrie@direct.ca>
Re: FileMaker Pro && Perl <link@tss.no>
Getting hex codes from string (Choo Heng Kek)
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community <merlyn@stonehenge.com>
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community (Mike Whitaker)
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community (Tim Smith)
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community (Tim Smith)
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community <dak@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
Re: GPL documentation == unspeakable evil <dak@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
Re: GPL documentation == unspeakable evil <dak@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
Re: GPL documentation == unspeakable evil <dak@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
Re: GPL documentation == unspeakable evil (Tim Smith)
Re: GPL documentation == unspeakable evil (Tim Smith)
Help! I need a script put up a new message every day on <nico@infonet2000.com>
Help! Need script that will load new image every day in <nico@infonet2000.com>
Re: More double standards out of the FSF <rra@stanford.edu>
Re: Non-greedy regexp still eatting all the pies! <gmorgan@photographics.co.uk>
Re: Perl for Windows is important, and comments on COM <jimbo@soundimages.co.uk>
Re: Tom Christiansen attacks the free software communit ()
use Berkley DB slow down script? Is Benchmark accurate? tdj@mail.com
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 8 Mar 97) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1998 10:42:22 +0300
From: <jari.aalto@poboxes.com> (Jari Aalto+mail.perl)
Subject: Re: Benchmark: pre-extending array?
Message-Id: <tb3ee2rbtt.fsf@blue.sea.net>
--Multipart_Fri_May_22_10:42:20_1998-1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
|Wed 98-05-20 jdporter@min.net (John Porter) comp.lang.perl.misc
Thanks to all for the comments about the benchmarks!
I learned a lot from the followups which showed better suites
and more accurate testing of the subject at hand.
| danboo@negia.net (Dan Boorstein) wrote:
| > John Porter wrote:
| >
| > > my @a = (undef) x $size;
| >
| > i'm not so sure this is the sort of pre-extending the camel refers to.
| > the above is indeed extending, but it is quite explicit. it assigns a
| > temporary list of 1000 undefined elements to an array. i believe the
| > camel refers to implict extending through setting $#a or by assigning
| > $a[$size-1] to undef.
|
| You're so right. I was using Jari's code as a basis, and didn't see my
| mistake until later, and then I didn't think much was to shown by
| any benchmarks.
|
| > i believe this issue was recently beat to death on the p5p list so i
| > would check the archives for a variety of benchmark results. the
| > thread is called "Array preallocation: the devil's work?"
|
| 10-4.
What's this :-)
I Took John's test and added the $# case which really boosted the
performance.
jari
--Multipart_Fri_May_22_10:42:20_1998-1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
extending = $#
extending2 = (undef) x $size
control: 11 secs (11.39 usr 0.01 sys = 11.40 cpu)
extending: 12 secs (11.39 usr 0.01 sys = 11.40 cpu)
extending2: 15 secs (15.07 usr 0.01 sys = 15.08 cpu)
pushing: 21 secs (20.86 usr 0.02 sys = 20.88 cpu)
--Multipart_Fri_May_22_10:42:20_1998-1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
my $n = 1_000;
my $size = 1_000;
sub pushing
{
my $c = 1;
my @a;
for (1..$size)
{
$c ||= $_;
push @a, undef;
}
\@a;
}
sub extending
{
my $c = 1;
$#a = $size;
for (1..$size)
{
$c ||= $_;
}
\@a;
}
sub extending2
{
my $c = 1;
my @a;
my @a = (undef) x $size;
for (1..$size)
{
$c ||= $_;
}
\@a;
}
sub control
{
my $c = 1;
my @a;
for (1..$size)
{
$c ||= $_;
}
\@a;
}
timethese( $n,
{
pushing => \&pushing,
extending => \&extending,
extending2 => \&extending2,
control => \&control
});
--Multipart_Fri_May_22_10:42:20_1998-1--
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1998 10:51:01 +0300
From: <jari.aalto@poboxes.com> (Jari Aalto+mail.perl)
Subject: Re: Camel p. 541: "Prefer join()"
Message-Id: <tbzpgapwuy.fsf@blue.sea.net>
|Thu 98-05-21 rjk@coos.dartmouth.edu (Ronald J Kimball) comp.lang.perl.misc
| Jari Aalto+mail.perl <jari.aalto@poboxes.com> wrote:
|
| > timethese( 1_000,
| > {
| > a =>
| > 'for (1..300)
|
| Why do you set the variables every time through the loop? That's not
| part of the code you're trying to benchmark.
| And why do you have a loop inside the benchmark loop? That's not part
| of the code you're trying to benchmark either.
I was merely interested in the relative differences, so any
contant statements that stay the same between suites won't matter.
| Next time you want to start 6 or 8 threads about benchmarking, I would
| suggest learning how Benchmark actually works and how to use it
| effectively. (That's based on all your Benchmark posts, not just this
| one.)
I was purposively provocative :-) I wanted to see comments from
others to show me if I had understood the benchmarking all wrong.
While the FOR loops were superfluous, they only were constans.
I learnt that it would be better to benchmark functions and
supply 'control' as in John'n responses.
The Benchmark pod page does not highlight these issues, so could I ask
someone to update and write "rules of thumb" to the pod page, plus an
simple example (demonstration of proper benchmarking) that would
benchmark some relatively differences between couple of perl
statements; which is the fastest.
jari
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 01:29:51 +0800
From: Austin Schutz <spamsux-tex@habit.com>
Subject: Can we please get back on topic?
Message-Id: <3564648F.207B@habit.com>
This thread is getting a bit barren. Can you guys please
take this to gnu.misc.discuss (only)?
Thanky,
Tex
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 07:06:18 GMT
From: cls@seawood.org (Christopher Seawood)
Subject: Re: Clearly define "free software"
Message-Id: <Kt991.381$C06.1491914@news.san.rr.com>
robert havoc pennington (hp@pobox.com) wrote:
: cls@seawood.org (Christopher Seawood) writes:
:
: > : Now, they may not say what they mean explicitly enough for your
: > : liking, but I think it's clear that they don't *mean* to be
: > : contradictory. I find www.opensource.org a better source of
: > : definitions, really, and the FSF does agree with that definition too.
: >
: > Again, the results of their actions fall a bit short of their good intentions.
: >
:
: I agree the results may not be perfect. My problem with your position
: is that I am not sure anyone else has done any better. All the other
: major licenses have problems of ambiguity and practice as well.
Ok, if the results aren't perfect, then what's wrong with attempting
to make them perfect? I've already stated that FSF's defintion of free
software, pretty much matches my own. What's wrong with changing 'good
enough' (as I've heard people describe the GPL) into 'even better'?
And why does it matter if the other major licenses have this problem?
Is the purpose of the GPL to be "better" than the other licenses or
to insure that "free software as defined by the FSF" remains free?
: > GPL prohibits distribution of joint GPL and non GPL-compatible work.
: > And since this joint work is derived from the GPL'd work, it is covered
: > by the GPL. An example of this is xmcd+motif under linux. I am free
: > to use, copy, modify and redistribute modifications of xmcd source
: > according to the GPL. However, the moment I link it with motif under
: > linux, I am violating the GPL. Same thing goes for KDE & Qt (unless
: > you're running SuSE).
: >
:
: Yes, that's both a plus and a minus. You just have to decide what your
: goals are, so you know what tradeoffs you want to make.
It definitely seems to be much more of a minus than a plus. So rather
than get software that uses a proprietary library but works, I get
nothing. That's not convenient at all. Thanks, but no thanks.
Regards,
Christopher
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 09:34:26 GMT
From: "Ross Lawrie" <rlawrie@direct.ca>
Subject: FileMaker && Perl
Message-Id: <CEb91.387$44.1734590@newsgate.direct.ca>
I'm hoping to find some way to work with a FileMaker Pro databse from perl
(because FMPro's script language is shit). Any ideas??
Please email me at:
jmagnuss@theriverstyx.net
Thanks!
Jeff Magnusson
System Administrator
River Styx
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 09:34:25 GMT
From: "Ross Lawrie" <rlawrie@direct.ca>
Subject: FileMaker Pro && Perl
Message-Id: <BEb91.386$44.1734590@newsgate.direct.ca>
I'm hoping to find some way to work with a FileMaker Pro databse from perl
(because FMPro's script language is shit). Any ideas??
Please email me at:
jmagnuss@theriverstyx.net
Thanks!
Jeff Magnusson
System Administrator
River Styx
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 11:49:04 +0200
From: Terje Bless <link@tss.no>
To: Ross Lawrie <rlawrie@direct.ca>
Subject: Re: FileMaker Pro && Perl
Message-Id: <link-2205981149040001@news.uit.no>
[[ This message was both posted and mailed: see
the "To" and "Newsgroups" headers for details. ]]
In article <BEb91.386$44.1734590@newsgate.direct.ca>,
Ross Lawrie <rlawrie@direct.ca> wrote:
>I'm hoping to find some way to work with a FileMaker Pro databse from perl
>(because FMPro's script language is shit). Any ideas??
That depends. If we're talking FMP for Mac OS (you did know that FMP is
dual-platform, didn't you?), you can use MacPerl's AppleEvent (OSA-ish)
interface to do this. This should be semi-elegant and work reasonably
well. aFAIK, there is no Perl-native interface to FMP.
If this is for the windoze version of FMP I really have no idea, but I
would expect FMP to have some kind of external scripting interface
similar to AppleEvents on MacOS (OLE? CORBA?).
>Please email me at:
>jmagnuss@theriverstyx.net
Then set Reply-To there.
--
Party? Party, lord? Yes, lord. Right away, lord.
- Beopunk Cyberwulf
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1998 08:45:57 GMT
From: kek@olympus.irdu.nus.sg (Choo Heng Kek)
Subject: Getting hex codes from string
Message-Id: <6k3e05$o9e$1@nuscc.nus.edu.sg>
Greetings
I want to read in a string and then print the hex codes of
each character of the string.
The following is what I do now, but am hoping for more "elegant"
solutions from perl hackers out there:
@buf = unpack('C*', $string);
while(@buf){ printf "%02x:", shift @buf }
If $string is "abc", the output is "61:62:63".
Any suggestions or comments?
Thanks for reading.
Heng Kek
BioInformatics Centre
Singapore
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 07:18:47 GMT
From: Randal Schwartz <merlyn@stonehenge.com>
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <8cra1mn57u.fsf@gadget.cscaper.com>
>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Mornini <tmornini@netcom.com> writes:
Tom> I'll also point out that royalties paid by O'Rielly to the
Tom> authors of some of these books mostly likely allowed some of
Tom> these same folks to devote more of their time to the free
Tom> software movement...
I can certainly support that statement. Both personally, and by
pointing out that Larry is essentially funded these days from the
money that ORA makes off Perl. And yet, Larry would not have taken on
this ORA arrangement without first *securing* that "core Perl" remains
"free" (in all senses of the word), and thus doesn't become a "product
of ORA".
I have this firsthand.
--
Name: Randal L. Schwartz / Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095
Keywords: Perl training, UNIX[tm] consulting, video production, skiing, flying
Email: <merlyn@stonehenge.com> Snail: (Call) PGP-Key: (finger merlyn@teleport.com)
Web: <A HREF="http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/">My Home Page!</A>
Quote: "I'm telling you, if I could have five lines in my .sig, I would!" -- me
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1998 08:25:48 GMT
From: mrw@malay.entropic.co.uk (Mike Whitaker)
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <slrn6madfe.dku.mrw@malay.entropic.co.uk>
In article <hH391.93$152.968093@cam-news-reader1.bbnplanet.com>,
Barry Margolin wrote:
>IANAL either, but I believe the fair use exceptions also specify the
>purposes you can use those excerpts for. These include educational
>purposes and critiquing (this is what allows book reviewers to quote a
>paragraph from the book), but I don't think embedding in another computer
>program would fall into any of the categories.
<IAMerelyAProgrammer>
Seems sensible to me. It may be that the letter of the law allows you to
do it, but I can't see that the spirit of the law would, say, allow
me to cut/paste the AUTOLOAD and $foo->{_permitted} tricks from perltoot
into my publicly available code without acknowledgement to tc, if not more,
depending on the exact terms of the license and what terms I was releasing my
code under.
I *assume* (although I'm getting increasingly ticked off at my own inability
to find anywhere that makes this explicitly clear in any of several Perl
binary distributions I have access to) that using example code from the
documentation places me under some obligation to release source.
</IAMAP> (I am just a tad confused).
--
Mike Whitaker: Sysadmin, Entropic Cambridge Research Labs
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1998 01:42:34 -0700
From: tzs@halcyon.com (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <6k3dpq$mgb$1@halcyon.com>
Tom Christiansen <tchrist@mox.perl.com> wrote:
> make its way into a revision of the Camel Book. While it is
> * copyright by me with all rights reserved, permission is granted
> * to freely distribute verbatim copies of this document provided
> * that no modifications outside of formatting be made, and that
> * this notice remain intact. You are permitted and encouraged
When GNU people talk about "free", they mean freedom to modify and
share the modifications. You aren't allowing that (which is quite
reasonable for you to do), and so your stuff does not fit in with
what they want, and so it is quite reasonable for them to have on
their wish list that someone write documentation that does allow
that.
--Tim Smith
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1998 02:22:47 -0700
From: tzs@halcyon.com (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <6k3g57$mve$1@halcyon.com>
Tom Christiansen <tchrist@mox.perl.com> wrote:
>Now, as to modification, why would screw with something counter to its
>author's intentions and wishes? That's evil. And if you don't want
>to do something to fight the original author, then the author will
>be happy to apply your patches. It's *his* work, damn it, not yours.
>Again I ask: what happened to basic respect for others' work here?
Some people would like to have documentation that they can change
without having to contact and coordinate with the original author.
Or perhaps the changes are extensive and specialized, so the original
author does not want to incorporate them. It shows no disrespect for
your work to wish for this.
--Tim Smith
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1998 11:43:14 +0200
From: David Kastrup <dak@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <m2wwbevdxp.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
cadams@ro.com (Chris Adams) writes:
> According to Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>:
> >mrw@uiuc.edu (Matthew R. Williams) writes:
> >> The kernel doesn't look like it's heavily influenced by GNU anything.
> >> Linus wrote that from scratch.
> >
> >But the kernel would have never existed without gcc and binutils.
>
> It also wouldn't have existed without Minix, as the original versions
> were cross compiled and used the Minix filesystem. Does that mean we
> should rename it Minix/Linux?
Bad point. A Linux system contains and relies on a heavy amount of
GNU software. It does not contain any Minix software. Linux users
usually are very willing to acknowledge that. What they usually don't
want to acknowledge is that their system is a mere "variant GNU
system".
Mercedes will acknowledge the importance Bosch plays for their cars.
Still they would object to Bosch calling Mercedes cars Bosch/Mercedes
or a variant Bosch car.
The whole credit issue could have been managed much much more sanely.
Choosing the "brand name" for the attack was pretty stupid.
--
David Kastrup Phone: +49-234-700-5570
Email: dak@neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de Fax: +49-234-709-4209
Institut f|r Neuroinformatik, Universitdtsstr. 150, 44780 Bochum, Germany
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1998 08:59:48 +0200
From: David Kastrup <dak@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
Subject: Re: GPL documentation == unspeakable evil
Message-Id: <m2lnru3i57.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
Tom Christiansen <tchrist@mox.perl.com> writes:
> [courtesy cc of this posting sent to cited author via email]
>
> In comp.lang.perl.misc,
> robert havoc pennington <hp@pobox.com> writes:
> :Why not add a line of clarification to your
> :docs, saying "you may distribute this in any case where you may
> :distribute perl"?
>
> I hadn't realized that that was not understood to be the case. I will
> certainly add something like that. But I will exempt it from the GPV.
> I want free documentation, not encumbered viral stuff.
That's ok with the FSF. You will find in other cases as well that the
FSF is perfectly willing to use and recommend other forms of free
software meeting certain requirements, mostly free redistribution, and
freedom to modification (clauses like "you must insert prominent
notices about any changes you did to the stuff in the file" are
usually considered ok). They just prefer the GPL for stuff of their
own and recommend using it for otehrs as well.
If you put a license on your work that will
a) allow commercial redistribution (so that vendors like RedHat that
are making a living from distributing free software are allowed to do
so),
b) allow that versions of the documentation might be adapted and
redistributed by
others, as long as they don't remove the references to you as an
original author, while still pointing out that they are responsible
for changes done
then the FSF will quite probably remove the necessity for free
documentation for Perl from its task list. You need not "burden" your
docs with any of the restrictions of the GPL you don't like in order
to meet the FSFs requirements for free software (or documentation).
Of course, b) would also imply that one can reprint the docs and make
money of them. With GPLed docs, this rarely happens, as the printer
is in this case forced to explicitly permit the photocopying of the
results, and most printers don't like that.
But if you don't want something like "GPL infectious nature" that is a
necessary evil you have to live with if you want to meet basic
requirements for free software.
--
David Kastrup Phone: +49-234-700-5570
Email: dak@neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de Fax: +49-234-709-4209
Institut f|r Neuroinformatik, Universitdtsstr. 150, 44780 Bochum, Germany
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1998 11:36:12 +0200
From: David Kastrup <dak@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
Subject: Re: GPL documentation == unspeakable evil
Message-Id: <m2zpgave9f.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
Tom Christiansen <tchrist@mox.perl.com> writes:
> [courtesy cc of this posting sent to cited author via email]
>
> In comp.lang.perl.misc, chris+usenet@netmonger.net writes:
> :Don't you understand that the FSF's purpose for
> :existence is to promote free software
>
> Don't be silly. The purpose is to get people to write encumbered
> software. Software that's free of strings attached is anti-FSF.
Nonsense. The FSF has no problem with using free software under other
licenses for their projects (for example, the X window system in its
freely released forms). They don't bother, for example, writing
software for which there are BSD-like equivalents available. For
example, the Hurd relies on running on the Mach microkernel.
> RMS shoves his dogma down the throats of those whose idea of freedom
> doesn't include viruses. That goes over like a lead balloon.
RMS has designed the GPL in order to encourage the distribution of
freely redistributable, freely maintainable software and encourages
others applying it to their works. That is not shoving dogma down the
throats of anybody.
Your documentation is neither freely redistributable (as it may not be
redistributed by free software vendors like RedHat that make a living
from doing so), nor freely maintainable as you prohibit any
modifications by others. That means that the destiny of the docs in
question is entirely bound to your destiny and the destiny of your
interest or capabilites in them. You can effectively redraw your docs
when you stop releasing new versions since they will then in time
become outdated.
To RMS, a continuing dependency like that for a component important to
the free software community is not desirable. Hence his request for
otehrs to perhaps consider providing software with a few guarantees to
the free software community.
> Listen closely: the free software is much bigger, and much more important,
> than the FSF. They don't want to hear this, but it's true. The world
> does not revolve around Richard, who strangely wants us all to send
> him money.
Listen closely: the free software is much bigger, and much more
important, than you. You don't want to hear this, but it's true. The
world will not always revolve around you, who strangely wants us all
to accept his right to be the only provider for documentation for
Perl.
The GPL is designed (among others) as a public license: once released
under the GPL, a software can take on a life of its own independent
from that of its author, if the author fails in some way to remain
cooperative (if only by overwork or death).
You don't need to release stuff under the GPL, but as long as you
release under a license that does not allow anybody else in taking
up the work, you cannot complain that RMS finds the situation
suboptimal. This does not mean that anybody *will* take the work out
of your hands (after all, it *is* work and people are glad if somebody
else does it), but it gives a reassurance that the continuity of Perl
documentation might be provided for even in case that people feel that
you are no longer able to do that.
Please answer this question: what will happen to the Perl
documentation if you happened to die? People will then be in one heck
of an ugly fix.
--
David Kastrup Phone: +49-234-700-5570
Email: dak@neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de Fax: +49-234-709-4209
Institut f|r Neuroinformatik, Universitdtsstr. 150, 44780 Bochum, Germany
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1998 11:37:38 +0200
From: David Kastrup <dak@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
Subject: Re: GPL documentation == unspeakable evil
Message-Id: <m2yavuve71.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
fl_aggie@thepentagon.com (I R A Aggie) writes:
> In article <6k1cl6$d6g$1@schenectady.netmonger.net>,
> chris+usenet@netmonger.net wrote:
>
> + The
> + whole POINT of the GPL is to let people write free software and know
> + that it can never be taken and used in a non-free product.
>
> Then its not really _free_ software, is it?
An American citizen may not be taken as a slave, nor sell himself as
one. It seems that he is not really free, then.
--
David Kastrup Phone: +49-234-700-5570
Email: dak@neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de Fax: +49-234-709-4209
Institut f|r Neuroinformatik, Universitdtsstr. 150, 44780 Bochum, Germany
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1998 02:30:13 -0700
From: tzs@halcyon.com (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: GPL documentation == unspeakable evil
Message-Id: <6k3gj5$n3k$1@halcyon.com>
Tom Christiansen <tchrist@mox.perl.com> wrote:
>It is imperative that no documentation be placed under the GPL due to its
>insidious viral nature. For example, the Perl documentation is meant to
>be used to take examples from to use in your programs. We want people
>to do this.
Add this to your copyright notice:
"The Perl examples in this documentation are in the public
domain".
(run the exact wording past a copyright lawyer first, of course)
Then, people can use the examples in the own programs *no* *matter*
*what* license they are using for those programs, just as if they had
written them themselves.
--Tim Smith
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1998 02:46:18 -0700
From: tzs@halcyon.com (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: GPL documentation == unspeakable evil
Message-Id: <6k3hha$n6t$1@halcyon.com>
Tom Christiansen <tchrist@mox.perl.com> wrote:
>I have no right to force moral choices on others--or they cease to be
>moral choices. No one applauds the cow because it did not rise up and
>slay the eagle. Doing something you're forced into doing merits no
>moral high ground. It just means you've been forced to do things their
>way. This is contrary to the whole spirit of Perl--and public morals.
>You can't legislate morality, and I shall resist all attempts to do so.
I don't see how your licensing terms are not forcing choices on others.
Both your license and FSF's license (and every other license other)
essentially say "I will let you use my work if you do X". For FSF, X is
basically "license your work the same way we licensed our work". For
you, X is something like "not change it and not claim authorship and not
try to make money from it". For, say, Microsoft, X is "give us money".
I don't see how your requirements are any more or less moral than FSF's
(or Microsoft's).
Actually, I don't think the term "force" is appropriate in any of these
cases. I do not have a right to use your code, or FSF's code, or
Microsoft's code. Saying any of these licenses forces me to do
something makes no more sense than saying that 7-11 forced me to pay a
buck of a Pepsi.
--Tim Smith
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 00:46:33 -0700
From: Nico Princely <nico@infonet2000.com>
Subject: Help! I need a script put up a new message every day on a web page.
Message-Id: <35652D58.EA5BD9DF@infonet2000.com>
I need a script put up a new message every day on a web page. So I can
automate things.
I need it for free too.......
--
Nico Princely E-mail: nico@infonet2000.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 00:40:32 -0700
From: Nico Princely <nico@infonet2000.com>
Subject: Help! Need script that will load new image every day in webpage......
Message-Id: <35652BF0.4C6BEF19@infonet2000.com>
I Need script that will load new image every day in webpage for a Pic of
the day feature. I want to automate the process so I don't have to do it
manually.......
And it should be free, If I have to pay for it, I will just wright
it....
any help would be appreciated....
--
I
Nico Princely E-mail: nico@infonet2000.com
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1998 00:15:18 -0700
From: Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: More double standards out of the FSF
Message-Id: <m3pvh6n5dl.fsf@windlord.Stanford.EDU>
In comp.lang.perl.misc, Barry Margolin <barmar@bbnplanet.com> writes:
> Anyway, if the name is sacrosanct (and I believe even RMS agrees with
> this, as I think he pushed for the non-GNU Emacs's to have distinct
> names like Xemacs), I would just call my version PerlFixed or something
> like that if I fixed a bug in Perl.
I would presume that if you fixed a bug in Perl, you would submit the
patch back the maintainers rather than simply forking your own version.
As a matter of simple politeness.
Simple politeness seems to be thrown out the window in these discussions
far too often.
--
#!/usr/bin/perl -- Russ Allbery, Just Another Perl Hacker
$^=q;@!>~|{>krw>yn{u<$$<[~||<Juukn{=,<S~|}<Jwx}qn{<Yn{u<Qjltn{ > 0gFzD gD,
00Fz, 0,,( 0hF 0g)F/=, 0> "L$/GEIFewe{,$/ 0C$~> "@=,m,|,(e 0.), 01,pnn,y{
rw} >;,$0=q,$,,($_=$^)=~y,$/ C-~><@=\n\r,-~$:-u/ #y,d,s,(\$.),$1,gee,print
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 09:09:59 +0100
From: "Glenn Morgan" <gmorgan@photographics.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Non-greedy regexp still eatting all the pies!
Message-Id: <6k3bhq$9km$1@news.u-net.com>
Tom Phoenix wrote in message ...
>On Thu, 21 May 1998, Glenn Morgan wrote:
>
>Is this the problem?
>
> $_ = 'you are matching more, and you want to match less';
> print "$1\n" if /(you.*?$)/;
>
>Is this the solution?
>
> $_ = 'you are matching more, and you want to match less';
> print "$1\n" if /.*(you.*$)/;
Yes that was the solution for the example string I cited. So I went of and
modified my code and then found another instance of the same problem. This
is what happened
Modified regexp
s/(.*)(<tbl .+?<\/tbl>)(<cross-ref refid=\"tbl.+?<\/cross-ref>)(<tbl
.+?>)/$1$3$2$4/;
applied to following string
Some text<cross-ref refid="tbl1">Table 1</cross-ref><tbl
id="tbl1"><tblbdy><r><c>text</tblbdy></tbl>A line of text between two table
elements<cross-ref refid="tbl2">Table 2</cross-ref><tbl
id="tbl2"><tblbdy><r><c>text</tblbdy></tbl><cross-ref refid="tbl3">Table
3</cross-ref><tbl id="tbl3"><tblbdy><r><c>text</tblbdy></tbl>Some more text
gives
Some text<cross-ref refid="tbl1">Table 1</cross-ref><cross-ref
refid="tbl3">Table
3</cross-ref><tbl id="tbl3"><tbl
id="tbl1"><tblbdy><r><c>text</tblbdy></tbl>A line of text between two table
elements<cross-ref refid="tbl2">Table 2</cross-ref><tbl
id="tbl2"><tblbdy><r><c>text</tblbdy></tbl><cross-ref refid="tbl3">Table
3</cross-ref><tbl id="tbl3"><tblbdy><r><c>text</tblbdy></tbl>Some more text
but I need
Some text<cross-ref refid="tbl1">Table 1</cross-ref><cross-ref
refid="tbl3">Table
3</cross-ref><tbl id="tbl3"><tbl
id="tbl1"><tblbdy><r><c>text</tblbdy></tbl>A line of text between two table
elements<cross-ref refid="tbl2">Table 2</cross-ref><cross-ref
refid="tbl3">Table
3</cross-ref><tbl
id="tbl2"><tblbdy><r><c>text</tblbdy></tbl><tbl
id="tbl3"><tblbdy><r><c>text</tblbdy></tbl>Some more text
I only what to move <cross-ref> if it appears between 2 table elements and
then only move it to the beginning of the first table in the match.
My current regexp gives
$1 = Some text<cross-ref refid="tbl1">Table 1</cross-ref>
$2 = <tbl
id="tbl1"><tblbdy><r><c>text</tblbdy></tbl>A line of text between two table
elements<cross-ref refid="tbl2">Table 2</cross-ref><tbl
id="tbl2"><tblbdy><r><c>text</tblbdy></tbl>
$3 = <cross-ref refid="tbl3">
$4 = <tbl id="tbl3"><tblbdy><r><c>text</tblbdy></tbl>
The match that gives $2 is the problem, I need it to match exactly one table
element and no more so I end up with
$1 = Some text<cross-ref refid="tbl1">Table 1</cross-ref><tbl
id="tbl1"><tblbdy><r><c>text</tblbdy></tbl>A line of text between two table
elements<cross-ref refid="tbl2">Table 2</cross-ref>
$2 = <tbl id="tbl2"><tblbdy><r><c>text</tblbdy></tbl>
$3 = <cross-ref refid="tbl3">
$4 = <tbl id="tbl3"><tblbdy><r><c>text</tblbdy></tbl>
If I could say something like this
s/(.*)(<tbl [^(?:<\/tbl>)]+<\/tbl>)(<cross-ref
refid=\"tbl.+?<\/cross-ref>)(<tbl .+?>)/$1$3$2$4/;
and [^(?:<\/tbl>)] had a match width of a single character it would work.
What exactly does happen when you try use a regexp containing a pattern like
that (different question, I know)?
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Glenn
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1998 08:04:53 +0100
From: Jim Brewer <jimbo@soundimages.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Perl for Windows is important, and comments on COM and CPAN
Message-Id: <ulnrudbvu.fsf@soundimages.co.uk>
smcdow@arlut.utexas.edu (Stuart McDow) writes:
> dpj@ddt.occ.uc.edu (Dane Jackson) writes: > I know that on NT you
> can just check > if ($ENV{"OS"} eq "Windows_NT"){ > #print error
> message here > } Better to check $^O
That's not entirely correct. $^O will return Win32 and will not make
the distinction between Win95 and WinNT. The Win32 module can be use'd
and Win32::IsWinNT or Win32::IsWin95 invoked to detiermine which
version perl is executing on.
FYI. Jim Brewer
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1998 08:37:57 GMT
From: micschne@grapool1.rz.uni-frankfurt.de ()
Subject: Re: Tom Christiansen attacks the free software community (was: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community)
Message-Id: <6k3dh5$2cvc$1@grapool30.rz.uni-frankfurt.de>
Tom Christiansen (tchrist@mox.perl.com) wrote:
> I'm sorry Barry, but when Joe Anybody hears the word "free", his thought
> is "gratis", not "libre". Go ask someone on the street what a "free
> lunch", a "free computer", a "free hamburger", or some "free software"
> are. Heck, I'll bet they even get the wrong idea about "free rooms".
> Go ahead. This is all very misleading.
The fact is, that the GPL does exactly say, what it means by
"freedom". You may have another definition for that. But you won't
get the "true" intension of that expression by asking the common
man on the street (though Sokrates did so ;-)
Another point is, that this is also a matter of language. If you ask
a german person, what he is thinking about the meaning of a "free
computer" ("freier Computer"), I'll bet, he would think on things
like a computer, no one sits before, or a computer which has no
owner. You have to say explicitly "kostenloser Computer" (which
means "gratis") to make him understand, that you talk about costs.
On the other hand, when you talk about "free lunch", everyone will
think on a gifted meal, so in german "free" is not a distinct
expression, too. And I agree, that "free software" is understood
as "gratis software" by most people.
There might be other languages, where "free" inherently refers
to libre and where you must say something like "gratis", if you
refer to prices. I wonder if someone reading this thread knows
such a language.
Michael
--
Michael Schneider
m_schnei@cs.uni-frankfurt.de
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 08:20:53 GMT
From: tdj@mail.com
Subject: use Berkley DB slow down script? Is Benchmark accurate?
Message-Id: <6k3ch4$r38$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
Hello,
With my old script I was using .TXT files to read/write records which are
frequently accessed. Recently I rewrite the script to use the standard Perl
DB files, in the hope that it will improve scripts' efficiency.
However, using Benchmark to test the old and new scripts (results at the end
of this message), I found my old script actually performs better than the new
scrpt (use less CPU), actually sometimes 2-3 times faster.
Should I avoid to use Perl DB? Shouldn't Perl DB reduce disk access and
improve my script's efficiency? What is the difference between usr / sys /
cpu returned by the timediff string?
Any suggestion / comments will be very appreciated.
Regards
Ted
Benchmarks of my scripts:
New DB. (using Perl DB for records)
============================
That took 4 secs ( 0.07 usr 0.02 sys = 0.09 cpu)
That took 6 secs ( 0.09 usr 0.03 sys = 0.12 cpu)
That took 3 secs ( 0.05 usr 0.03 sys = 0.08 cpu)
That took 0 secs ( 0.05 usr 0.01 sys = 0.06 cpu)
That took 1 secs ( 0.08 usr 0.00 sys = 0.08 cpu)
That took 3 secs ( 0.06 usr 0.02 sys = 0.08 cpu)
That took 1 secs ( 0.05 usr 0.04 sys = 0.09 cpu)
That took 4 secs ( 0.09 usr 0.04 sys = 0.13 cpu)
Old DB. (Use simple .txt files for record access
==================================
That took 2 secs ( 0.03 usr 0.06 sys = 0.09 cpu)
That took 3 secs ( 0.00 usr 0.03 sys = 0.03 cpu)
That took 6 secs ( 0.01 usr 0.03 sys = 0.04 cpu)
That took 5 secs ( 0.01 usr 0.02 sys + 0.00 cusr 0.01 csys =
0.04 cpu)
That took 2 secs ( 0.02 usr 0.01 sys = 0.03 cpu)
That took 4 secs ( 0.01 usr 0.05 sys = 0.06 cpu)
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
------------------------------
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 2681
**************************************
