-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>As long as were culling, might want to consider removing chomp() and
>possibly chop(). The language provides other ways to accomplish those thru a
>simple regex, and if the "println" suggestion I made was "too specific" then
>certainly chomp() is as well.
Not really. I've provided a definition of println that is simple and
fast as a subroutine. I challenge you to do the same (remember,
fast--no regexps, sorry) for chomp and chop given neither.
And we're not culling--we're just preventing bloat. println was never
there, so there's nothing to cull.
Riad Wahby
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
5105
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE5kC5GiHor6RkxxqYRAkp1AJ9f774bPQD9rfMFpLO1CUn8v0CmsQCfZD2n
VjvNpVN9aD60QtLLIVZoY98=
=V5H4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
