Re: Hi & a question

[drieux]

On Dec 31, 2003, at 8:28 AM, John McKown wrote:

For only 4 variables, I thought it was overkill to have an "ini" file.
However as I continue to mess around with my code, I'm adding more and
more externalized variables. Use of an "ini" is becoming more 
appealing.
john,

for what it is worth - cf:

in it I have references to two pieces of demonstration
code that you might want to think about as tactics in
this type of problem.


ciao
drieux
---

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

Re: Hi & a question

[John McKown]

Daniel,
For only 4 variables, I thought it was overkill to have an "ini" file. 
However as I continue to mess around with my code, I'm adding more and 
more externalized variables. Use of an "ini" is becoming more appealing. 

Thanks for your thoughts!

 On Sun, 28 Dec 2003, Daniel Staal wrote:

> Personal opinion: A cfg file is much easier to update/maintain then 
> environment variables, and a command line is easier to use for 
> 'variable' setups.  For a case like this I would probably want to use 
> a combined commandline/config file setup.  Luckily, that only 
> requires *one* CPAN module: AppConfig.  It will handle both, in 
> either order.
> 
> Daniel T. Staal
> 

--
Maranatha!
John McKown


-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

Re: Hi & a question

[drieux]

On Dec 26, 2003, at 9:37 AM, John McKown wrote:
[..]
E.g.

export DIR1=...
export DIR2=...
export IPADDR=...
export IPPORT=...
perl-script.perl
or

perl-script.perl DIR1 DIR2 IPADDR IPPORT
[..]

Thanks for the seasonal ranting option:



I must confess that I find it rather ironic that you
started with environmental variables rather than
positional arguments. I would of course recommend
that you start with
	perldoc Getopt::Long

One of my more demented variants is up at:


But what I think you will really want to get in touch with
is the idea of a configuration file, either as a 'default
preference' file, if this is really going to be an application
layer programme - or in the more traditional set of issues
related to writing daemons and configuration files for them.
ciao
drieux
---

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

Re: Hi & a question

[Daniel Staal]

--As off Friday, December 26, 2003 3:16 PM -0600, John McKown is 
alleged to have said:

Actually, I considered an "ini" or "cfg" file, but rejected it. I
was  wanting something more "standalone" in this case. First, it
seemed a bit  much for only 4 parms. Second, I didn't want to
maintain a separate file.  Third, I didn't want to parse an "ini"
file, although there is likely a  CPAN module around to do that.
And I already use LWP::UserAgent and  HTTP::Request::Common, so
requiring another CPAN modules is not really a  big deal. I really
appreciate CPAN!
--As for the rest, it is mine.

Personal opinion: A cfg file is much easier to update/maintain then 
environment variables, and a command line is easier to use for 
'variable' setups.  For a case like this I would probably want to use 
a combined commandline/config file setup.  Luckily, that only 
requires *one* CPAN module: AppConfig.  It will handle both, in 
either order.

Daniel T. Staal

---
This email copyright the author.  Unless otherwise noted, you
are expressly allowed to retransmit, quote, or otherwise use
the contents for non-commercial purposes.  This copyright will
expire 5 years after the author's death, or in 30 years,
whichever is longer, unless such a period is in excess of
local copyright law.
---
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

Re: Hi & a question

[John McKown]

On Fri, 26 Dec 2003, R. Joseph Newton wrote:

> 
> Hi John,
> 
> I'd suggest that both approaches can be somewhat lacking in portability.  The
> command line is something of a kludge, IMHO, as it still depends largely on
> users typing in the correct parameters.  I think ini files would be portable
> across a much wider variety of systems.  Just write the ini file per
> installation configuration.
> 
> Joseph
> 

Actually, I considered an "ini" or "cfg" file, but rejected it. I was 
wanting something more "standalone" in this case. First, it seemed a bit 
much for only 4 parms. Second, I didn't want to maintain a separate file. 
Third, I didn't want to parse an "ini" file, although there is likely a 
CPAN module around to do that. And I already use LWP::UserAgent and 
HTTP::Request::Common, so requiring another CPAN modules is not really a 
big deal. I really appreciate CPAN!

--
Maranatha!
John McKown


-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

Re: Hi & a question

[R. Joseph Newton]

John McKown wrote:

> I'm new here and a very novice Perl coder. And I have a question, of
> course .
>
> Is it more "Perl-like" to get information from the shell via UNIX
> Environment Variables or via the command line? For an example, I have
> writing a Perl program which reacts to messages sent to it. It has four
> input parameters. The current program gets this information, which is two
> distinct subdirectories, a port number, and an IP address, via four
> different environment variables. My question is should I do it that way or
> should I pass this information in via the command line.
>
> E.g.
>
> export DIR1=...
> export DIR2=...
> export IPADDR=...
> export IPPORT=...
> perl-script.perl
>
> or
>
> perl-script.perl DIR1 DIR2 IPADDR IPPORT
>
> Although my current code uses the first way, I'm beginning to think that
> the second is preferrable because it would be more portable to non-UNIX
> environments.
>
> I hope everybody is having a good holiday.
>
> --
> Maranatha!
> John McKown

Hi John,

I'd suggest that both approaches can be somewhat lacking in portability.  The
command line is something of a kludge, IMHO, as it still depends largely on
users typing in the correct parameters.  I think ini files would be portable
across a much wider variety of systems.  Just write the ini file per
installation configuration.

Joseph


-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

Re: Hi & a question

[R. Joseph Newton]

Pandey Rajeev-A19514 wrote:

> hey !!!
>
> do you celebrate only perl even in the christmas vacation !!!
> Take a break !! Have a kit kat christmas cake.
> Merry Christmas to this perl group 
>
> Rajeev

I might remind you--not everyone even celbrates that particular holiday.  I
join my family in the celebration, and finds that it works fine that way as a
celebration of the solstice.  I cetainly don't feel, though, that I have to
stop creative engagements, to celbrate a holiday.

Joseph


-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

RE: Hi & a question

[Harvey, Bruce T.]

I'm not a 'perl' pro, but I am a pro at using different shells, programs and
so on in different environments.  

It depends on the environment in which you're running.

For example, running on some type of *NIX at a command line, you might very
well want command line options so that people and scripts can easily change
the arguments (it is a pain to change environment variables ... more typing
and saving and exporting and what not).

However, if your perl script is called from other perl scripts (since people
aren't typing it), you may want to change the environment.

Of course, you may want to hide the arguments, in which case, variables in a
file readable by the script would be the choice, so that no one could see
the arguments (*NIX ps -elf) or the environment (*NIX ps axe).

IMHO, it really depends on what the best use is ... how much a pain ...
what's the protection ... do different people need different environments
but NEVER change it once they have that environment (the case for
Environment variables) ... etc.

I don't run much under M$ Windows, but that may very well point you in a
particular direction, based on what's easily available.

Bruce T. Harvey
Legg Mason Wood Walker, Inc.
Corporate Technology - UNIX Admin.
Red Run 2nd Floor - Owings Mills, MD
(410) 580-7383 - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---



-Original Message-
From: John McKown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 26, 2003 12:38 PM
To: Perl Beginners Mailing List
Subject: Hi & a question


I'm new here and a very novice Perl coder. And I have a question, of 
course .

Is it more "Perl-like" to get information from the shell via UNIX 
Environment Variables or via the command line? For an example, I have 
writing a Perl program which reacts to messages sent to it. It has four 
input parameters. The current program gets this information, which is two 
distinct subdirectories, a port number, and an IP address, via four 
different environment variables. My question is should I do it that way or 
should I pass this information in via the command line. 

E.g.

export DIR1=...
export DIR2=...
export IPADDR=...
export IPPORT=...
perl-script.perl

or

perl-script.perl DIR1 DIR2 IPADDR IPPORT

Although my current code uses the first way, I'm beginning to think that 
the second is preferrable because it would be more portable to non-UNIX 
environments.

I hope everybody is having a good holiday.

--
Maranatha!
John McKown


IMPORTANT:  The security of electronic mail  sent through the Internet 
is not guaranteed.  Legg Mason therefore recommends that you do not 
send confidential information to us via electronic mail, including social 
security numbers, account numbers, and personal identification numbers.

Delivery, and timely delivery, of electronic mail is also not 
guaranteed.  Legg Mason therefore recommends that you do not send time-sensitive 
or action-oriented messages to us via electronic mail, including 
authorization to  "buy" or "sell" a security or instructions to conduct any 
other financial transaction.  Such requests, orders or instructions will 
not be processed until Legg Mason can confirm your instructions or 
obtain appropriate written documentation where necessary.

-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

RE: Hi & a question

[Steven Kreuzer]

Why not just make DIR1, DIR2, IPADDR AND IPPORT global variables within
the script, rather then requiring user to set env variables, which can
become a pain in the ass.

Your best bet would be to set them to some default variable, and then if
the user needs to, she can override the default values by passing the
new values as parameters. Hope that helps.

Steven Kreuzer
Linux Systems Administrator
Etagon, Inc
W: 646.728.0656
F: 646.728.0607
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-Original Message-
From: John McKown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, December 26, 2003 12:38 PM
To: Perl Beginners Mailing List
Subject: Hi & a question

I'm new here and a very novice Perl coder. And I have a question, of 
course .

Is it more "Perl-like" to get information from the shell via UNIX 
Environment Variables or via the command line? For an example, I have 
writing a Perl program which reacts to messages sent to it. It has four 
input parameters. The current program gets this information, which is
two 
distinct subdirectories, a port number, and an IP address, via four 
different environment variables. My question is should I do it that way
or 
should I pass this information in via the command line. 

E.g.

export DIR1=...
export DIR2=...
export IPADDR=...
export IPPORT=...
perl-script.perl

or

perl-script.perl DIR1 DIR2 IPADDR IPPORT

Although my current code uses the first way, I'm beginning to think that

the second is preferrable because it would be more portable to non-UNIX 
environments.

I hope everybody is having a good holiday.

--
Maranatha!
John McKown


-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

RE: Hi & a question

[Pandey Rajeev-A19514]

hey !!!

do you celebrate only perl even in the christmas vacation !!!
Take a break !! Have a kit kat christmas cake.
Merry Christmas to this perl group 

Rajeev 

-Original Message-
From: John McKown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 26, 2003 11:08 PM
To: Perl Beginners Mailing List
Subject: Hi & a question


I'm new here and a very novice Perl coder. And I have a question, of 
course .

Is it more "Perl-like" to get information from the shell via UNIX 
Environment Variables or via the command line? For an example, I have 
writing a Perl program which reacts to messages sent to it. It has four 
input parameters. The current program gets this information, which is two 
distinct subdirectories, a port number, and an IP address, via four 
different environment variables. My question is should I do it that way or 
should I pass this information in via the command line. 

E.g.

export DIR1=...
export DIR2=...
export IPADDR=...
export IPPORT=...
perl-script.perl

or

perl-script.perl DIR1 DIR2 IPADDR IPPORT

Although my current code uses the first way, I'm beginning to think that 
the second is preferrable because it would be more portable to non-UNIX 
environments.

I hope everybody is having a good holiday.

--
Maranatha!
John McKown


-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 


-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]