Paul Johnson wrote:
> I have occassionally used ?: as an lvalue.
>
> Perlop used to say "This is not necessarily guaranteed to
> contribute to the readability of your program", but that
> seems to have gone from recent versions. Anyone know why?
My guess would be that someone (with a reduced s
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 06:13:38PM -0800, Paul Makepeace wrote:
[MY RANT]
>
> Guilty as charged, although I'm sure it was unintentional -- a product
> of banging out the original script in about five minutes...
>
Ah, you work for an ISP :)
> > How about:
> >
> > next unless
> > /^[^#]* >
On Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 12:47:16AM +, Nick Cleaton wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 12:45:16PM -0800, Paul Makepeace wrote:
> > Then you won't like,
>
> No, not a lot :)
>
> > #!/usr/bin/perl -wln
> >
> > next unless /^[^#]*
> That doesn't need to be as obfuscated as that, you've placed th
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 12:45:16PM -0800, Paul Makepeace wrote:
> #!/usr/bin/perl -wln
>
> next unless /^[^#]* [snip main loop]
>
> sub run_analog {
> # stuff
>
> $server_name = $doc_root = $log = '';
> }
Hmm, I've just noticed a bug. The return value from run_analog is always
false
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 12:45:16PM -0800, Paul Makepeace wrote:
> >
> > Until the day that $cond1 is true and action1() returns '0',
> > when it breaks mysteriously.
>
> Then you won't like,
No, not a lot :)
> #!/usr/bin/perl -wln
>
> next unless /^[^#]*
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 09:23:44AM +, Nick Cleaton wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 09:00:56AM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
> > and I'm still not sure whether I utterly hate it or not...
> >
> >$cond1 && action1() ||
> >$cond2 && action2() ||
> >...
> >
> > works just as 'well'...
On 21 Jan 2002, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> > "Piers" == Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Piers> But, but, that should be
>
> Piers> $foo && do_foo_stuff() || do_other_stuff();
>
> And just to make sure my objections are noted in every thread
> you say this:
>
> D
> "Piers" == Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Piers> But, but, that should be
Piers> $foo && do_foo_stuff() || do_other_stuff();
And just to make sure my objections are noted in every thread
you say this:
DON'T DO THAT.
Any more than you'd use JAPH or Golf code in pro
> "Nick" == Nick Cleaton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Nick> On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 09:00:56AM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
>> $cond1 && action1() ||
>> $cond2 && action2() ||
>> ...
>>
>> works just as 'well'...
Nick> Until the day that $cond1 is true and action1() returns '0',
Nick> when it
> Sent: 21 January 2002 09:01
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Erm, Hello?
>
> David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> I've seen it used as a 'switch' type operator:
>
>$cond1 ? action1() :
>$cond2 ? action2() :
>$c
Ivor Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jonathan Peterson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote
>
>
>> > what? .. with *4* spaces ?? come come mr McCarroll, we all know it is 2
>> > spaces ... :)
>
>> Spaces? SPACES?!!! It's called a tab, Tee Ay Bee. Code is indented with
>> TABs, not spaces. O
Jonathan Stowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have this problem with Term::Cap that the diffs always report stuff
> being different between my (i.e. the CPAN version ) and the core version -
> this is always todo with weird white space handling :(
I always use diff -b to ignore such things as me
On Sun, 20 Jan 2002 16:41:10 +
David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 04:23:46PM +, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> > * Dominic Mitchell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > >
> > > $foo ? do_foo_stuff() : do_other_stuff();
> > >
> >
> > Ok, this started off as a bi
On Sun, 20 Jan 2002 16:41:10 +
David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 04:23:46PM +, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> > * Dominic Mitchell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > >
> > > $foo ? do_foo_stuff() : do_other_stuff();
> > >
> >
> > Ok, this started off as a bi
Jonathan Peterson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote
> > what? .. with *4* spaces ?? come come mr McCarroll, we all know it is 2
> > spaces ... :)
> Spaces? SPACES?!!! It's called a tab, Tee Ay Bee. Code is indented with
> TABs, not spaces. Only bad bad people use spaces to indent.
... or bad
> what? .. with *4* spaces ?? come come mr McCarroll, we all know it is 2
> spaces ... :)
Spaces? SPACES?!!! It's called a tab, Tee Ay Bee. Code is indented with
TABs, not spaces. Only bad bad people use spaces to indent.
--
Jonathan Peterson
Technical Manager, Unified Ltd, +44 (0)20 7383 60
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 09:00:56AM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
>
> I've seen it used as a 'switch' type operator:
>
>$cond1 ? action1() :
>$cond2 ? action2() :
>$cond3 ? action3() :
>...
>$condN ? actionN();
>
> and I'm still not sure whether I utterly hate it or not...
>
>
David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 04:23:46PM +, Greg McCarroll wrote:
>> * Dominic Mitchell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> >
>> > $foo ? do_foo_stuff() : do_other_stuff();
>> >
>>
>> Ok, this started off as a bit of a joke/troll, however i'm about to
>
Dominic Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> You're still wrong in the oneline case:
>>
>> if ($foo) { do_foo_stuff() }
>> else { do_other_stuff() }
>
> Are you sure it isn't:
>
> $foo ? do_foo_stuff() : do_other_stuff();
What? The ternar
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 11:35:21PM +0100, Paul Johnson wrote:
> able to determine this". It is not trivial to formally prove that the
> && and || stuff actually does mimic the if statement.
Presumably it's made harder by the fact they don't...
P
--
Paul Makepeace .
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 09:06:55PM +, Tom Insam wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 06:37:03PM +0100, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 11:23:16AM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
> > >
> > > $foo && do_foo_stuff();
> > > $foo || do_other_stuff();
> >
> > As an example of ho
On Sun, 20 Jan 2002, Paul Makepeace wrote:
>
> Besides, I think the preferred idiom for this kind of conditional should
> be,
>
> s/(.*)\*(.*)/$1.($foo?"foo":"other").$2/ee for my $t="do_*_stuff"
>
* Smack
/J\
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 06:37:03PM +0100, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 11:23:16AM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
> >
> > $foo && do_foo_stuff();
> > $foo || do_other_stuff();
>
> As an example of how not to code I hope. Apart from anything else (of
> which there is plen
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 06:37:03PM +0100, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > $foo && do_foo_stuff();
> > $foo || do_other_stuff();
>
> As an example of how not to code I hope. Apart from anything else (of
> which there is plenty) that's going to give your code coverage fits.
> Your path coverage wi
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 07:28:22PM +, Mark Fowler wrote:
>
> I looked at the code and couldn't tell what it was doing. This isn't to
> say I couldn't work out what it's doing, but I don't want to have to have
> to work out what it's doing - I just want to read and instantly
> understand.
[S
David H. Adler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Does this make me "Good Dave"? :-)
>> No chance.
>"OK Dave"?
l33t dave.
--
http://www.the-anathema.org
"In addition to requiring a larger percentage than a majority (51%
being a majority), a supermajority can also shoot lasers out of its
eyes." - Mc
On Sun, 20 Jan 2002, Dave Cross wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 02:19:43PM -0500, David H. Adler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 06:52:54PM +, Sue Spence wrote:
> > > Har har har. The Dave being addressed in the first note is commonly
> > > known as "Evil Dave"
> >
> >
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 02:26:41PM -0500, anathema wrote:
> David H. Adler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Does this make me "Good Dave"? :-)
>
> No chance.
"OK Dave"?
--
David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
There's more than one way to skin a cat, and I happen to k
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 02:19:43PM -0500, David H. Adler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 06:52:54PM +, Sue Spence wrote:
> > Har har har. The Dave being addressed in the first note is commonly
> > known as "Evil Dave"
>
> Oh, I'm very well aware of that...
>
> Does this
David H. Adler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Does this make me "Good Dave"? :-)
No chance.
--
http://www.the-anathema.org
"These young writers... are worth watching. Not reading; just
watching." - Dorothy Parker
On Sun, 20 Jan 2002, Nick Cleaton wrote:
> How do we feel about the use of ?: in this code ?
I looked at the code and couldn't tell what it was doing. This isn't to
say I couldn't work out what it's doing, but I don't want to have to have
to work out what it's doing - I just want to read and i
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 06:52:54PM +, Sue Spence wrote:
> Har har har. The Dave being addressed in the first note is commonly
> known as "Evil Dave"
Oh, I'm very well aware of that...
Does this make me "Good Dave"? :-)
dha
--
David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dh
Har har har. The Dave being addressed in the first note is commonly
known as "Evil Dave"
"David H. Adler" wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 19, 2002 at 08:47:53AM +, Aaron Trevena wrote:
> >
> > Dave, being evil is no excuse for indenting like a moonshine crazed lemur!
>
> No, I imagine doing anything
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 05:39:16PM +, Jonathan Stowe wrote:
> The conditional operator should never be used purely for its side effects
> IMO - It should always been an assignment.
I'd agree with that, though I have occassionally used ?: as an lvalue.
Perlop used to say "This is not necessa
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 05:39:16PM +, Jonathan Stowe wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Jan 2002, Greg McCarroll wrote:
>
[?: DEBATE]
How do we feel about the use of ?: in this code ? Strictly
speaking it's a triple nested ?: but I like the pattern it
makes.
s[
(?:
On Sun, 20 Jan 2002, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> * Dominic Mitchell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> > $foo ? do_foo_stuff() : do_other_stuff();
>
> For what its worth, i think this syntax is one of the worst pieces
> of syntax in Perl. If/else is a well recognised piece of syntax in
> programmin
On Sun, 20 Jan 2002, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> * Dominic Mitchell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >
> > $foo ? do_foo_stuff() : do_other_stuff();
> >
>
> Ok, this started off as a bit of a joke/troll, however i'm about to
> take my own bait
>
> For what its worth, i think this syntax is one o
On Sun, 20 Jan 2002, David Cantrell wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 04:23:46PM +, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> > * Dominic Mitchell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > >
> > > $foo ? do_foo_stuff() : do_other_stuff();
> > >
> >
> > Ok, this started off as a bit of a joke/troll, however i'm about t
On Sun, 20 Jan 2002, Chris Benson wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 11:21:17AM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
> >
> > if you want. Generally, all it asks is that you are consistent. Not
> > an overly hard burden. You can even use tabs if you want, but again,
> > you have to be consistent.
>
> *
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 04:41:10PM +, David Cantrell wrote:
>
> The really sick puppies (cough) are those who nest ?: inside each other.
I've seen that. I've had to *work* with code like that... It's
EEVIL...
dha
--
David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
"It
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 04:23:46PM +, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> * Dominic Mitchell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >
> > $foo ? do_foo_stuff() : do_other_stuff();
> >
>
> Ok, this started off as a bit of a joke/troll, however i'm about to
> take my own bait
>
> For what its worth, i th
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 11:23:16AM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
> Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > You're still wrong in the oneline case:
> >
> > if ($foo) { do_foo_stuff() }
> > else { do_other_stuff() }
>
> Are you sure it isn't:
>
> $foo ? do_foo_stuff() : do_other
* Dominic Mitchell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> $foo ? do_foo_stuff() : do_other_stuff();
>
Ok, this started off as a bit of a joke/troll, however i'm about to
take my own bait
For what its worth, i think this syntax is one of the worst pieces of
syntax in Perl. If/else is a well re
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 11:21:17AM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
>
> if you want. Generally, all it asks is that you are consistent. Not
> an overly hard burden. You can even use tabs if you want, but again,
> you have to be consistent.
*I'm* consistent: it's all the other buggers!
And of
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You're still wrong in the oneline case:
>
> if ($foo) { do_foo_stuff() }
> else { do_other_stuff() }
Are you sure it isn't:
$foo ? do_foo_stuff() : do_other_stuff();
Or perhaps (which I was shown in an interview once):
$foo && do_foo_st
David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
> making me do:
>
> if($foo)
>do_foo_stuff(); # note that that is a pointless number of
># spaces, not a tab
> else # more arbitrary spacing
>do_other_stuff();
>
> instead of my preferred:
>
> if($foo) {
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 12:02:22AM +, Jonathan Stowe wrote:
> #!/usr/bin/perl -P
>
> #define BEGIN {
> #define END }
>
> if ($foo)
> BEGIN
>do_foo_stuff()
> END
> else
> BEGIN
>do_other_stuff()
> END
>
> Yes I don't know anything about source filters and lord knows what happens
>
On Sat, 19 Jan 2002, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> * David Cantrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >
> > if($foo) { do_foo_stuff(); }
> > else { do_other_stuff(); }
> >
>
> Now you are being silly, you know it should be ...
>
> if ($foo) {
> do_foo_stuff();
> } else {
> do_other_stuff();
> }
>
On Fri, 18 Jan 2002, David Cantrell wrote:
>
> I am the person best qualified to decide how my
> code should be indented. Anyone else can use $pretty_printer_of_choice.
>
Go tell COBOL about it :)
/J\
On Sat, Jan 19, 2002 at 08:47:53AM +, Aaron Trevena wrote:
>
> Dave, being evil is no excuse for indenting like a moonshine crazed lemur!
No, I imagine doing anything like a moonshine crazed lemur is probably
its own reward.
Yet Another Dave
--
David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http:
On Sat, Jan 19, 2002 at 12:25:58AM -0800, Paul Makepeace wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 11:26:43PM +, David Cantrell wrote:
> > if($foo)
> >do_foo_stuff(); # note that that is a pointless number of
> ># spaces, not a tab
> > else # more arbitrary spacing
> >
Greg McCarroll wrote:
> * David Cantrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >
> > if($foo) { do_foo_stuff(); }
> > else { do_other_stuff(); }
> >
>
> Now you are being silly, you know it should be ...
>
> if ($foo) {
> do_foo_stuff();
> } else {
> do_other_stuff();
> }
>
> this is much much be
Aaron Trevena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
F> On Sat, 19 Jan 2002, Greg McCarroll wrote:
>
>> * David Cantrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> >
>> > if($foo) { do_foo_stuff(); }
>> > else { do_other_stuff(); }
>> >
>>
>> Now you are being silly, you know it should be ...
>>
>> if ($foo) {
>>
On Sat, 19 Jan 2002, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> * David Cantrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >
> > if($foo) { do_foo_stuff(); }
> > else { do_other_stuff(); }
> >
>
> Now you are being silly, you know it should be ...
>
> if ($foo) {
> do_foo_stuff();
> } else {
> do_other_stuff();
On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 11:26:43PM +, David Cantrell wrote:
> if($foo)
>do_foo_stuff(); # note that that is a pointless number of
># spaces, not a tab
> else # more arbitrary spacing
>do_other_stuff();
do_stuff($foo);
> instead of my preferred:
>
>
* David Cantrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> if($foo) { do_foo_stuff(); }
> else { do_other_stuff(); }
>
Now you are being silly, you know it should be ...
if ($foo) {
do_foo_stuff();
} else {
do_other_stuff();
}
this is much much better.
Greg
--
Greg McCarroll
On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 11:06:25AM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
>
> Python also forces you to indent consistently, which some people seem
> to think is a bug, not a feature. :-)
>
making me do:
if($foo)
do_foo_stuff(); # note that that is a pointless number of
On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 11:34:58AM -0600, Chris Devers wrote:
> Damn Thinkpad keyboard. Is there any way to map F1 to ESC for Vim? I'm
> going to be hitting the wrong key *a lot*, I can feel it...
:imap
--
Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pjcj.net
On Fri, 18 Jan 2002, Chris Devers wrote:
> On 18 Jan 2002, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
>
> > Chris Devers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > The O'Reilly book "Programming Python on win32" is pretty good at
> > explaining how to get the most out of Python under win32. It goes
> > through scriptin
Chris Devers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well in the case of the job I'm taking, it's being used as an alternative
> to Java, not Perl, because it is similar to Java in ways that this group
> cares about, but it's not restricted to the Java sandbox model. This
> allows it to bind better to Micro
On 18 Jan 2002, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
> Chris Devers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> The O'Reilly book "Programming Python on win32" is pretty good at
> explaining how to get the most out of Python under win32. It goes
> through scripting Word/Excel and calling COM and so on in detail.
I th
On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 04:27:50PM +, robin szemeti wrote:
> On Friday 18 January 2002 15:05, David H. Adler wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 11:06:25AM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
> > >
> > > Python also forces you to indent consistently, which some people seem
> > > to think is a bug,
On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 11:06:25AM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
>
>
> Python also forces you to indent consistently, which some people seem
> to think is a bug, not a feature. :-)
>
Wouldn't there have to be some vague basis for argument with those
statements for it to be holy-war material?
On Fri, 18 Jan 2002, Ivor Williams wrote:
> Chris Devers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
>
> > ...a job, actually. I just accepted a contract as a Python coder! :)
>
> Does Python have any advantages over Perl?
Well in the case of the job I'm taking, it's being used as an alternative
to Jav
Rob Partington sent the following bits through the ether:
> Or write a TT->Parrot compiler. :-)
Yes, Parrot would make an interesting target for TT, 'cos of the
optimisations it could make. I've been thinking about this somewhat,
but real templates need plugins and objects and such, so we reall
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Andy Wardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In particular, I'm waiting for the Template Toolkit to be ported to Ruby
> and then I might use it more often. But I understand the author is a little
> busy right now...
I made a start on that. I ported the tokenizer an
On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 11:08:23AM +, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
> I did just that, which means I don't know much about Python. But Ruby is
> the only language other than Perl that makes me grin and say "Hey,
> that's cool" on a regular basis*. And from what little I've seen Ruby is
> more Perli
robin szemeti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Who has keys to buildings and/or root or sysadmin passwords?
>most of the skrip1 k1dd1es on the planet have r00t apparently :)
Ah, but the double 0s mean it's 'special' root.
--
http://www.the-anathema.org
Your prize is the latest addition to our new ra
Andy Wardley wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 09:14:41AM -, Ivor Williams wrote:
> > I have noticed that although Python is more obscure, it seems to have more
> > commercial take-up in certain places. My present client are using it for
> > test scripts.
> But if you're interested in alter
Ivor Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Chris Devers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
>
> > ...a job, actually. I just accepted a contract as a Python coder! :)
>
> Does Python have any advantages over Perl?
There aren't too many basic differences, although the languages /look/
very diff
On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 09:14:41AM -, Ivor Williams wrote:
> I have noticed that although Python is more obscure, it seems to have more
> commercial take-up in certain places. My present client are using it for
> test scripts.
Python is a bit like Perl with all the sharp edges filed off. It'
Chris Devers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> ...a job, actually. I just accepted a contract as a Python coder! :)
Does Python have any advantages over Perl?
I have noticed that although Python is more obscure, it seems to have more
commercial take-up in certain places. My present client a
Chris Benson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote
> Been quiet all day tho' ... I was wondering if Penderel were poorly:
> obviously not.
As a matter of interest, whom do we tell if Penderel, hence london.pm.org
does go off the air?
Who has keys to buildings and/or root or sysadmin passwords?
This
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 02:33:48PM -0600, Chris Devers wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2002, Chris Benson wrote:
>
> > Gone out an got a life? :-)
>
> ...a job, actually. I just accepted a contract as a Python coder! :)
Congratulations &/or commiserations!
--
Chris Benson
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 09:30:13PM +, Rafiq Ismail (ADMIN) wrote:
>
> Nah, you sent that at 8:30pm, thus they were all probably oggling season 6
> Willow on skyOne.
:-)
Been quiet all day tho' ... I was wondering if Penderel were poorly:
obviously not.
--
Chris Benson
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 09:12:12PM +, Jonathan Stowe wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2002, Chris Devers wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 17 Jan 2002, Chris Benson wrote:
> >
> > > Gone out an got a life? :-)
> >
> > ...a job, actually. I just accepted a contract as a Python coder! :)
>
> Oh I got plenty of Jo
On Thu, 17 Jan 2002, Chris Benson wrote:
> Have you all gone skiing in Val Thorens?
> Had your computers re-possessed?
> Found some channel showing BtVS series 13?
Nah, you sent that at 8:30pm, thus they were all probably oggling season 6
Willow on skyOne.
fiq
On Thu, 17 Jan 2002, Chris Devers wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2002, Chris Benson wrote:
>
> > Gone out an got a life? :-)
>
> ...a job, actually. I just accepted a contract as a Python coder! :)
>
Oh I got plenty of Job .
/J\
On Thu, 17 Jan 2002, Chris Benson wrote:
> Gone out an got a life? :-)
...a job, actually. I just accepted a contract as a Python coder! :)
--
Chris Devers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Apache / mod_perl / http://homepage.mac.com/chdevers/resume/
Have you all gone skiing in Val Thorens?
Had your computers re-possessed?
Found some channel showing BtVS series 13?
Gone out an got a life? :-)
Hello?
--
Chris Benson
80 matches
Mail list logo
