On 26 May 2014, at 17:45, Simon Wistow wrote:
> On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 07:38:54PM +0200, Thomas Klausner said:
>> If you want a hash of the current DB schema, take a look at
>> DBIx::SchemaChecksum
>>
>> Not sure if this is what you're after, but I hope it helps..
>
> It would be perfect ... e
As part of the nasty mess that is CPANdeps, I have this line of code:
$record->{is_dev_perl} = (
$record->{perl} =~ /(^5\.(7|9|11|13|15|17|19|21)|rc|patch)/i
) ? 1 : 0;
I'd like to not have to remember to add 23 to the list in a year or so's
time. Can anyone think of a nice way of matching any
Surely you only need to examine the right-most digit to know if the number
is odd? Your special requirement to (AIUI) consider 0..7 as even isn't
difficult to add.
/joel
On 27 May 2014 16:22, David Cantrell wrote:
> As part of the nasty mess that is CPANdeps, I have this line of code:
>
> $rec
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 04:22:07PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
> As part of the nasty mess that is CPANdeps, I have this line of code:
>
> $record->{is_dev_perl} = (
> $record->{perl} =~ /(^5\.(7|9|11|13|15|17|19|21)|rc|patch)/i
> ) ? 1 : 0;
>
> I'd like to not have to remember to add 23 to th
$record->{perl} =~ /(^[0-9]*[13579]|rc|patch))/i
?
On 27 May 2014 16:22, David Cantrell wrote:
> As part of the nasty mess that is CPANdeps, I have this line of code:
>
> $record->{is_dev_perl} = (
> $record->{perl} =~ /(^5\.(7|9|11|13|15|17|19|21)|rc|patch)/i
> ) ? 1 : 0;
>
> I'd like to no
On 27/05/14 16:22, David Cantrell wrote:
As part of the nasty mess that is CPANdeps, I have this line of code:
$record->{is_dev_perl} = (
$record->{perl} =~ /(^5\.(7|9|11|13|15|17|19|21)|rc|patch)/i
) ? 1 : 0;
I'd like to not have to remember to add 23 to the list in a year or so's
time. Can
On 27 May 2014, at 16:22, David Cantrell wrote:
> As part of the nasty mess that is CPANdeps, I have this line of code:
>
> $record->{is_dev_perl} = (
> $record->{perl} =~ /(^5\.(7|9|11|13|15|17|19|21)|rc|patch)/i
> ) ? 1 : 0;
>
> I'd like to not have to remember to add 23 to the list in a yea
Apologies, didn't see the 7 upward (and missed the 5\.) . This can almost
certainly look nicer or smaller with a negative assertion or something.
However this should do the job.
$record->{perl} =~ /(^5\.(7|9|[1-9][0-9]*[13579])|rc|patch)/i
On 27 May 2014 16:53, Gareth Harper wrote:
> $rec
On 27/05/14 16:54, Dirk Koopman wrote:
$bool = ($record->{perl} > 7) & 1; # for example?
Clearly, I getting too old for this. Or my prevarication level too high...
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 04:22:07PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
> As part of the nasty mess that is CPANdeps, I have this line of code:
>
> $record->{is_dev_perl} = (
> $record->{perl} =~ /(^5\.(7|9|11|13|15|17|19|21)|rc|patch)/i
> ) ? 1 : 0;
>
> I'd like to not have to remember to add 23 to th
> As part of the nasty mess that is CPANdeps, I have this line of code:
>
> $record->{is_dev_perl} = (
> $record->{perl} =~ /(^5\.(7|9|11|13|15|17|19|21)|rc|patch)/i
> ) ? 1 : 0;
>
> I'd like to not have to remember to add 23 to the list in a year or so's
> time. Can anyone think of a nice way o
Something like the prime regex would work:
('1' x $foo) =~ /^(11)*1$/
On 27 May 2014 16:43, Joel Bernstein wrote:
> Surely you only need to examine the right-most digit to know if the number
> is odd? Your special requirement to (AIUI) consider 0..7 as even isn't
> difficult to add.
>
> /joel
>From 7 upwards is
('1' x $foo) =~ /^(11){3,}1$/
or something, I'm not even bothering to test this :S
On 27 May 2014 17:08, Jasper wrote:
> Something like the prime regex would work:
>
> ('1' x $foo) =~ /^(11)*1$/
>
>
> On 27 May 2014 16:43, Joel Bernstein wrote:
>
>> Surely you only need to
I'm furiously trying to think of an even stupider way of doing this...
On 27 May 2014 17:09, Jasper wrote:
> From 7 upwards is
>
> ('1' x $foo) =~ /^(11){3,}1$/
>
> or something, I'm not even bothering to test this :S
>
>
> On 27 May 2014 17:08, Jasper wrote:
>
>> Something like the prime rege
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 04:54:47PM +0100, Dirk Koopman wrote:
> On 27/05/14 16:22, David Cantrell wrote:
>> As part of the nasty mess that is CPANdeps, I have this line of code:
>>
>> $record->{is_dev_perl} = (
>>$record->{perl} =~ /(^5\.(7|9|11|13|15|17|19|21)|rc|patch)/i
>> ) ? 1 : 0;
>>
>> I
Odd numbers end in [13579] so... m{5 [.] \d* [13579]}gmsx ... ?
- Alex
And obviously I answered before letting your email sink in... "odd
number from 7 upwards"! But still, my solution should just about work
if you change \d* to \d+ and do the 9 manually :-)
- Alex
On 27 May 2014 16:42, Alex Balhatchet wrote:
> Odd numbers end in [13579] so... m{5 [.] \d* [13579]}g
On 27/05/14 17:21, Abigail wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 04:54:47PM +0100, Dirk Koopman wrote:
On 27/05/14 16:22, David Cantrell wrote:
As part of the nasty mess that is CPANdeps, I have this line of code:
$record->{is_dev_perl} = (
$record->{perl} =~ /(^5\.(7|9|11|13|15|17|19|21)|rc|patc
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 02:42:21PM +0100, Sam Kington said:
> What's wrong with dependencies? It just takes a few minutes to
> install, disc is cheap, and it's not like any of the rest of your code
> is going to magically start loading these new modules and being all
> bloaty and insecure or wha
Hi!
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 06:33:16PM +0100, Simon Wistow wrote:
> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 02:42:21PM +0100, Sam Kington said:
> > What's wrong with dependencies? It just takes a few minutes to
> > install, disc is cheap, and it's not like any of the rest of your code
> > is going to magically
On Tuesday, May 27, 2014, Sam Kington wrote:
>
> Sounds like you want something like
>
> / ( ^ 5[.] ( [79] | \d+ [13579] ) ) /x
>
This is where I mention that \d matches characters other than [0-9] unless
you have the /a flag in effect (thanks Unicode!)
Mark
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 08:20:02PM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> I've never had problems with installing deps since cpanm came out.
>
> I usually do something like
> cpanm --installdeps . -n -L local
That's fortunate. In recent months I've encountered problems taking
this approach with a cl
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 05:45:26PM +0100, me said:
> If you're already using Moose I'm sure it's fantastic but adding ~120
> dependencies (of which ~30 are core admittedly) for something I could
> probably write in nearly as many lines of code[*] probably isn't going
> to fly unfortunately.
Wei
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 08:20:02PM +0200, Thomas Klausner said:
> Hi!
Wotcha!
> Well, we use DBIx::SchemaChecksum in some utility scripts that are
> invoked maybe once a day per hand (and quite often less than that).
>
> So neither process size nor start up time was an issue when writing it.
24 matches
Mail list logo
