http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xe1TZaElTAs
Perl is a shinto shrine.
Perl exists not as an edifice but as an act of love. Perl is a viable
programming option again today because millions of people woke up this
morning loving Perl.
And more importantly, they love one another in th
On Mon 15 Dec 2008, bl...@perlbloke.com wrote:
> I'm afraid I leaving this group.
Goodbye, Lyle. Hopefully the whining quotient of the list will go
down a bit now. If it doesn't, I'm sending you all to a Harvester for
the next social.
Kake
Hey People,
I'm afraid I leaving this group. I was going to post this 3 days ago, but I
thought best to let it sit over the weekend to make sure I felt the same way.
There seems to be an air of fear for all the people who lurk on this list.
For those that are brave enough to post, they soon ge
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 09:24:05PM +, Andy Wardley wrote:
> I welcome testing, feedback and comments, both good and bad. But it is
> worth bearing in mind that this is voluntary work and any complaints that
> are
> *too* vociferous may fall on deaf ears. Or be met with directions to the
> s
Andy Wardley wrote:
Nigel Rantor wrote:
I've already poked Andy about this when he put up the initial version.
Here's my reply to Nigel, for the benefit of anyone else interested.
Yes. I've always been a fluid-layout kinda guy. 800x600 is annoyingly
narrow when you've got a large monitor,
Dominic Thoreau wrote:
If you could guarantee that full-blown machines would be all that was
ever used, maybe. But this is simply not true. Plus the dot pitch is
different, which can really screw up some layouts.
True. I should have quantified that a bit better as referring to typical
desktop
Nigel Rantor wrote:
And I object to this attitude that one is not allowed to voice their
opinion on a subject if the subject in question is some form of
open/collaborative effort that one has not contributed to.
I have no objection to you voicing your objections.
And at the same time that doe
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 09:17:12PM +, Dominic Thoreau wrote:
> On ultra-portable netbooks (like my Eee) and on mobile phones, this
> sort of approach can make navigation impossible.
>
> If you could guarantee that full-blown machines would be all that was
> ever used, maybe. But this is simp
2008/12/14 Andy Wardley :
> But these days, it's considered "officially" OK to assume that 1024x768 is
> the lowest common denominator for screen width, which gives you a nicely
> sized
> bit of content-space to play with. Making it fluid upwards of that tends to
> result in wide wide columns that
Nicholas Clark wrote:
Whilst we fully support "there's more than one way to do it", the availability
of different hues of orange should provide more than enough alternatives. :-)
Aha! Well the brown design *is* actually orange! It's exactly the same hue
as the orange (30 deg), but de-saturate
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 07:35:42PM +, Nigel Rantor wrote:
> If it was a site I actively used I would complain loudly and vociferously.
>
> As it is, I don't. So I won't.
>
> I've already poked Andy about this when he put up the initial version.
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 08:48:43PM +, Nige
Nigel Rantor wrote:
I've already poked Andy about this when he put up the initial version.
Here's my reply to Nigel, for the benefit of anyone else interested.
Yes. I've always been a fluid-layout kinda guy. 800x600 is annoyingly
narrow when you've got a large monitor, so a fluid layout wa
Jonathan Stowe wrote:
I think you meant "I would submit patches" - strange how sometimes your
keyboard goes wrong like that.
No Jonathan, I don't mean that.
At all.
If I meant that I would have said it. Do you see?
And I object to this attitude that one is not allowed to voice their
opinio
On Sun, 2008-12-14 at 19:35 +, Nigel Rantor wrote:
> Nicholas Clark wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 06:33:34PM +, Andy Wardley wrote:
> >
> >> I've added 3 more colour schemes (light brown, teal and purple) for those
> >> who find the orange a bit too garish. I've also added a print st
Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 06:33:34PM +, Andy Wardley wrote:
I've added 3 more colour schemes (light brown, teal and purple) for those
who find the orange a bit too garish. I've also added a print stylesheet.
Heresy!
Whilst we fully support "there's more than one way
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 06:33:34PM +, Andy Wardley wrote:
> I've added 3 more colour schemes (light brown, teal and purple) for those
> who find the orange a bit too garish. I've also added a print stylesheet.
Heresy!
Whilst we fully support "there's more than one way to do it", the availab
Léon Brocard wrote:
Andy, care to put your changes live?
All checked in. It'll need to be built on the target machine.
I've added 3 more colour schemes (light brown, teal and purple) for those
who find the orange a bit too garish. I've also added a print stylesheet.
The stylesheet switcher
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 9:50 AM, Chris Jack wrote:
> 3) Write a Perl function that takes two references to arrays and returns the
> intersect of them. If an entry appears n times in array 1 and m times in
> array 2, the output should list that entry min(n,m) times. Bonus mark for one
> line sol
> 3) Write a Perl function that takes two references to arrays and returns the
> intersect of them.
> If an entry appears n times in array 1 and m times in array 2,
> the output should list that entry min(n,m) times.
> Bonus mark for one line solutions.
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
#*** compare_int_arra
19 matches
Mail list logo
