At 05/11/2002 01:20 [], David Cantrell wrote:
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 01:38:49PM +, Shevek wrote:
I do try to stay out of the opinion ring but this, in my opinion, is a
steaming pile. Scaling mod_perl up to a few hundred hits a second isn't
hard.
Scaling perl CGIs up to a few hundred a
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 01:20:15AM +, David Cantrell wrote:
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 01:38:49PM +, Shevek wrote:
I do try to stay out of the opinion ring but this, in my opinion, is a
steaming pile. Scaling mod_perl up to a few hundred hits a second isn't
hard.
Scaling perl
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 03:20:57PM +, Paul Makepeace wrote:
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 01:20:15AM +, David Cantrell wrote:
Scaling perl CGIs up to a few hundred a second is merely hard, but not
impossible.
Definitely on the difficult side of hard :-)
Agreed.
$ time perl -e '$a =
S == S Joel Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Scaling perl CGIs up to a few hundred a second is merely hard, but not
impossible.
S Perhaps heretically, I disagree. Until perl can be used (transparent
S of web server api engines, which don't do a fantastic job anyway) in
S such a way that
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 01:05:28AM +, Dave Wilson wrote:
As a result of this, we now have a steady stream of security
vulnerabilities published on major security mailling lists daily
about insecure PHP packages (I think this is how the discussion
started?).
This is true.
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 09:06:43AM +, Lusercop wrote:
As a result of this, we now have a steady stream of security
vulnerabilities published on major security mailling lists daily
about insecure PHP packages (I think this is how the discussion
started?).
This is true.
On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Dave Wilson wrote:
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 09:06:43AM +, Lusercop wrote:
Though I thought that there had been more than just that one. A remote
arbitrary code execution vulnerability is considerably more dangerous
than a local privilege escalation, in general.
On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Shevek wrote:
I remember people saying this about W3.11 when W95 came out.
I remember people saying this about W95 when W98 came out.
I remember people saying this about W98 when WNT came out.
Not to be too picky or anything, but...
WNT was first released before W3.11. It
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 12:17:40PM +, Dave Wilson wrote:
What this boils down to, is that
a) I don't believe that scalable and maintainable sites can be easily
written in PHP
I addressed this. It is because you suck, not the language. I thought
people liked perl because of it's
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 03:36:55PM +, Andrew Wilson wrote:
[Wilson-on-Wilson flame action snipped]
OK, how many of you Wilsons are related? It's rapidly turning into a
Dave situation. I for one am losing track...
P
--
Paul Makepeace ... http://paulm.com/
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 03:48:47PM +, Paul Makepeace wrote:
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 03:36:55PM +, Andrew Wilson wrote:
[Wilson-on-Wilson flame action snipped]
OK, how many of you Wilsons are related? It's rapidly turning into a
Dave situation. I for one am losing track...
Oh Dave
* Andrew Wilson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I realise that none of this is relevant to whether PHP is inferior to
perl. It does however relate directly to your qualifications to
pontificate on the subject.
can we please skip the now inevitable mudslinging argument, its too
near chrimbo for
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 03:36:55PM +, Andrew Wilson said:
As someone who's debugged, modified, and written extensions for PHP,
you seemed to have an inordinate amount of trouble coding one simple
Linux Users Group web site.
Umm. To quote a certain bunch of stereotyped scoursers on a
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 03:54:14PM +, Greg McCarroll wrote:
* Andrew Wilson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I realise that none of this is relevant to whether PHP is inferior to
perl. It does however relate directly to your qualifications to
pontificate on the subject.
can we
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 03:54:14PM +, Greg McCarroll ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
can we please skip the now inevitable mudslinging argument, its too
near chrimbo for this sort of thing (m, duck, mm)
Don't get me started on bloody christmas!
Dave...
--
It was long ago and it
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 09:06:43AM +, Lusercop wrote:
I wouldn't say that using suidperl is safe, but using perl as a whole,
invoked by root, is not a bad thing. PHP has had remote attacks against
it:
http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=mod_php
Though I thought that
* Simon Wistow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Play nice children, and do try to get along. Otherwise we're no better
than Java programmers. [X0]
[X0] he says, working on the Give everybodsy a common enemy and they'll
get along school of management [X1]
scarily this isn't too bad a
On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Paul Makepeace wrote:
b) I don't believe that the general coding standard in the PHP binaries
is as high as is necessary to survive on the modern Internet
Well this is patently empirically shown to be false, since there are
millions of installed PHP systems quite
On Mon, 2002-11-04 at 16:30, Paul Makepeace wrote:
Scalable how? It's certainly capable of serving millions of hits a day.
The article on amihotornot's creation is worth a read, and that's a
LAMPHP site, http://www.webtechniques.com/archives/2001/05/hong/
Yeah, and I remember the hell he went
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 01:05:28AM +, Dave Wilson wrote:
b) The number of bad PHP programmers:
A properly coded PHP project should be just as secure as it's perl or
C (or insert-language-here) counterparts. It is the
In-24-hrs-Newbie who is writing code like
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 06:16:13PM +, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
On Mon, 2002-11-04 at 16:30, Paul Makepeace wrote:
Scalable how? It's certainly capable of serving millions of hits a day.
The article on amihotornot's creation is worth a read, and that's a
LAMPHP site,
On Mon, 2002-11-04 at 18:22, Paul Makepeace wrote:
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 06:16:13PM +, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
On Mon, 2002-11-04 at 16:30, Paul Makepeace wrote:
Scalable how? It's certainly capable of serving millions of hits a day.
The article on amihotornot's creation is worth
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 01:38:49PM +, Shevek wrote:
I do try to stay out of the opinion ring but this, in my opinion, is a
steaming pile. Scaling mod_perl up to a few hundred hits a second isn't
hard.
Scaling perl CGIs up to a few hundred a second is merely hard, but not
impossible.
--
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 07:49:03PM -0800, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
Paul == Paul Makepeace [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Paul I am also amused and puzzled at the people writing huge tracts on why
Paul PHP is crap while not at the same time acknowledging there are vastly
Paul more websites
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 12:44:00AM +, Paul Makepeace wrote:
According to a Netcraft survey published in April 2002, PHP is now
being used by over 24% of the sites on the Internet. Of the 37.6 million
web sites reported worldwide
(http://www.netcraft.com/Survey/index-200204.html), PHP is
On 04/11/02 00:44 +, Paul Makepeace wrote:
I dunno, in light of reports like the one on LWN I'm struggling to see
this.
PHP Overtakes Microsoft's ASP as Web's #1 Server-side Scripting
Language: http://lwn.net/Articles/1433/
According to a Netcraft survey published in April 2002, PHP
Adrian Howard wrote:
You might also want to take a look at YAML http://yaml.org/ -
there's a YAML.pm already in CPAN.
YAML is something totally different. It's (essentially) for data
serialisation without the overhead of XML. AML is designed for humans
to write. More like POD than XML or
David Cantrell wrote:
Let me clear up a few things here. I wrote my toy system because I had an
itch which needed scratching.
Great!
The only reason I'm even bothering
to argue about this is because of the incorrect assertions coming from
people who really should know better that my sort
* Andy Wardley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
There is one point I would like to make about syntax, however. For TT
I deliberately chose an abstract syntax (e.g. 'user.name') rather than
sticking with Perl syntax (e.g. $user-{ name }).
So can we look forward to user-name under Perl 6? ;-)
Andy Wardley said:
In Perl you have to care about the difference between $user-name() and
$user-{ name }. But TT hides all that from you. I think that's the
Right Way To Do It. When you're doing presentation you shouldn't be
worrying about different data types and other programming crap
Greg McCarroll wrote:
So can we look forward to user-name under Perl 6? ;-)
Nope, user.name :-)
A
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Paul Makepeace wrote:
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 04:38:12PM -0500, Chris Devers wrote:
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, everyone wrote:
PHP is crap
I don't think PHP is crap.
I am also amused and puzzled at the people writing huge tracts on why
PHP is crap while not at
On Wed, 2002-10-30 at 22:42, Chris Devers wrote:
On 30 Oct 2002, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
does anyone have any recommendations for webmail that won't degenerate
into a templating argument?
Yeah, I'm impressed that in all this thread (over 100 messages?) I think
maybe one or two posts
* Chris Andrews ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
The learning curve to writing *bad* PHP is really flat. The learning curve
to writing good, secure, scalable PHP I would suggest is much steeper and
longer, because the language itself, and also the user community (and so
the support and resources
On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 09:27:14AM +, Greg McCarroll ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
* Chris Andrews ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
The learning curve to writing *bad* PHP is really flat. The learning curve
to writing good, secure, scalable PHP I would suggest is much steeper and
longer,
On 30 Oct 2002, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
does anyone have any recommendations for webmail that won't degenerate
into a templating argument?
http://fastmail.fm
OK, you can't install it anywhere, but it's far and away the best webmail
service out there. Supporting evidence includes:
* It plays
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 07:49:03PM -0800, Randal L. Schwartz said:
I don't. I suspect PHP runs more hobby sites. I suspect Perl does
more of the e-commerce heavy lifting and pretty-lifting.
Christ. I said I wasn't going to get pulled into this.
FWIW, according to the latest SecuritySpace
Dean Wilson wrote:
I'm going to ignore the PHP bashing and templating discussions and add that
Horde and SquirrelMail are both recommened on the GLLUG list when ever this
question comes up by a number of people. So while neither is written in
Perl both are in use.
I'm using an IMAP server here
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Andy Wardley wrote [and I slightly edited, sorry]:
$LANG is, or should be, a quick hack language. The fundamental
feature of embedding application code directly in presentation markup
is the biggest no-no there is. It leads to a poor (or non-existant)
separation of
Chris Devers wrote:
When is it nice to be a quick hack language that's
simple and easy, when does that lead to the biggest no-no there is?
Simple and easy quick hack languages are great. I've got nothing against
PHP or Perl in that respect.
But for larger projects that you want to be
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 04:38:12PM -0500, Chris Devers wrote:
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, everyone wrote:
PHP is crap
http://public.yahoo.com/~radwin/talks/yahoo-phpcon2002.htm
http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/10/29/2052239
Erek Dyskant writes Yahoo has decided to
http://public.yahoo.com/~radwin/talks/yahoo-phpcon2002.htm
http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/10/29/2052239
At 13:37 31/10/02, Nicholas Clark wrote:
Except for one part that I find curious. The presentation lists one of
the cons for perl as
poor sandboxing, easy to screw
Nicholas Clark wrote:
Except for one part that I find curious. The presentation lists one of
the cons for perl as
poor sandboxing, easy to screw up server
yet I get the feeling that that is the arguments against PHP. Or am I
confusing the idea of screwing up namespaces with screwing
Nicholas Clark wrote:
Except for one part that I find curious. The presentation lists one of
the cons for perl as
poor sandboxing, easy to screw up server
yet I get the feeling that that is the arguments against PHP. Or am I
confusing the idea of screwing up namespaces with screwing things
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Tim Sweetman wrote:
I don't know whether PHP would behave any more gracefully.
Is dumping core considered graceful?
S.
--
Shevek
I am the Borg.
sub AUTOLOAD{my$i=$AUTOLOAD;my$x=shift;$i=~s/^.*://;print$x\n;eval
qq{*$AUTOLOAD=sub{my\$x=shift;return unless
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Alex McLintock wrote:
I think I better learn PHP if for no better reason than to prepare for the
mass PHP to perl/java conversions when people realise that PHP is a bad idea.
I learnt enough PHP to install and use a non-core module, and get that,
and database access, and
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 10:08:42PM +, Tim Sweetman wrote:
For spaghetti avoidance, the right thing tends to constitute
nonspaghetti; separating stuff out; abstraction layers; passing the
right data, and just the right data, to another part of the system
through a comprehensible interface.
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 10:52:06PM +, Lusercop wrote:
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 02:07:12PM +, David Cantrell wrote:
Remember, all software sucks*. But to say that embedding application code
in markup leads to a poor (or non-existant) seperation of concerned,
typified by spaghetti
David Cantrell wrote:
Let me clear up a few things here. I wrote my toy system because I had an
itch which needed scratching. I looked at pre-existing alternatives and
rejected them all for various reasons. The only reason I'm even bothering
to argue about this is because of the incorrect
Shevek wrote:
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Tim Sweetman wrote:
I don't know whether PHP would behave any more gracefully.
Is dumping core considered graceful?
Compared with slurping memory forever or spitting to STDERR forever,
yes, very. One can't really fault a very ill person from leaving a
Dave Cross wrote:
Module naming is very important. I wonder how many other people have
been put off using HTML::Template because they aren't building HTML
with their templates?
I always thought the name related to the fact that the embedded tags
are designed to look just like HTML tags. You
Lusercop wrote:
I think my conclusion for all of this is that I can't trust PHP, because
architecturally, it appears to be designed for use in situations where the
necessity is not for any kind of privilege management, or separation. It
appears to be designed to get dynamic pages up and
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 10:26:41AM +, Andy Wardley wrote:
ASP is just as bad for much the same reasons. Used by people who don't
know any better and don't want to know any better.
That latter is what's so important. :-( And of course, it devalues the
skills of those who do know better. :-/
Chisel Wright wrote:
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 10:17:12AM +, Andy Wardley wrote:
I always thought the name related to the fact that the embedded tags
are designed to look just like HTML tags. You can generate non-HTML,
text but you have to use HTML-like tags to do it.
I haven't
Tim Sweetman wrote:
As I understand it, _the_ key difference between H::T and the other
templating systems available, is flow of control and data.
No, one of the key difference is that H::T *enforces* that model.
With TT (and others) it's optional.
Sometimes I use TT very strictly, and
Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
I believe XML is great for what it was intended: a cross-platform
vendor-neutral text-based representation of hierarchical
somewhat-self-describing data, somewhat robust to version upgrade.
However, I hate typing it. I hate having to type /foo when I get to
the
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 01:09:51PM +, Tim Sweetman wrote:
reductio ad=absurdum
... so we might as well all program in COBOL.
/reductio
That's not reductio ad absurdum, there's nothing absurd about
programming in cobol. Oh, wait
--
Lusercop.net - LARTing Lusers everywhere since 2002
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 01:09:51PM +, Tim Sweetman wrote:
David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 10:26:41AM +, Andy Wardley wrote:
PHP is, or should be, a quick hack language. The fundamental feature
of embedding application code directly in presentation markup is the
On 30 Oct 2002, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
[%
FOR key IN hash.keys
%]
tr
tdem[% key %]:/em/td
td[% hash.key %]/td
/tr
[%
END
%]
You seem to be reinventing Mason, with a slightly different syntax
As a Mason user, I
David Cantrell wrote:
But to say that embedding application code
in markup leads to a poor (or non-existant) seperation of concerned,
typified by spaghetti code is to talk bollocks.
Looks like I'm talking bollocks then. :-)
A
Ignorant in bliss.
David == David Cantrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Here's how you'd display a perl hash as an HTML table ...
David table
David tr
David thkey/th
David thvalue/th
David /tr
David perl
David foreach my $key (%hash) {
David /perl
David tr
David tdemperlprint
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, everyone wrote:
PHP is crap
http://public.yahoo.com/~radwin/talks/yahoo-phpcon2002.htm
http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/10/29/2052239
Erek Dyskant writes Yahoo has decided to switch from
a proprietary system written in C/C++ to PHP for their
On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 04:14 pm, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
Andy == Andy Wardley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andy I started writing it because, like you, I hate writing XML. Too
much
Andy verbosity and itty-bitty-get-everything-in-exactly-the-right-place
Andy nonsense. So I
David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 01:09:51PM +, Tim Sweetman wrote:
David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 10:26:41AM +, Andy Wardley wrote:
PHP is, or should be, a quick hack language. The fundamental feature
of embedding application code directly in
Andy Wardley wrote:
Sounds like you need AML - Andy's/Amazing/Abstract/Another/Arsecrack
Markup Language.
It's like XML, but not quite. It's also like Lisp, but not quite,
It's also like, nearly finished, but not quite.
XML: titleblah blah/title
AML: title:blah blah
Aw, you mean
On 30 Oct 2002, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
does anyone have any recommendations for webmail that won't degenerate
into a templating argument?
Yeah, I'm impressed that in all this thread (over 100 messages?) I think
maybe one or two posts actually addressed the question. I was also looking
forward
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 02:07:12PM +, David Cantrell wrote:
Since noone else has really argued this, I'm going to rise to it, as to
me, Cantrell obviously needs a good kick up the backside.
Remember, all software sucks*. But to say that embedding application code
in markup leads to a poor
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 10:22:17PM +, Tim Sweetman wrote:
OK, so if/when they try and scale them up (and assuming you and I are
onto something here, and PHP _is_ harder to build big systems in)
You ought to know better than to post this! (especially this week).
--
Lusercop.net - LARTing
IMP is another popular PHP-based system.
www.horde.org/imp
If you can afford it and have control over the choice of mail
server, I'd recommend looking at Samsung Contact.
www.samsungcontact.com
Their webmail is tightly integrated with the mail server via
their own UAL API + Apache (no IMAP
Lusercop wrote:
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 02:07:12PM +, David Cantrell wrote:
Since noone else has really argued this, I'm going to rise to it, as to
me, Cantrell obviously needs a good kick up the backside.
Grr. I _knew_ connecting my outgoing mail via IP-over-sloth was going to
cause
On 2002.10.30 08:14 Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
It looked a bit ugly, but LISP *can be* ugly.
This is true. Lisp is one of the few languages with an actual entitlement to
ugliness.
Randy
--
---
Randy J. Ray | Men
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 10:38:23PM +, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
does anyone have any recommendations for webmail that won't degenerate
into a templating argument?
Needs to be seriously rewritten because of shonky coding, but the demo
works and it seemed to have a reasonable feature set:
- Original Message -
From: Dave Hodgkinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
does anyone have any recommendations for webmail that won't degenerate
into a templating argument?
I'm going to ignore the PHP bashing and templating discussions and add that
Horde and SquirrelMail are both recommened on the
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 04:38:12PM -0500, Chris Devers wrote:
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, everyone wrote:
PHP is crap
I don't think PHP is crap.
I am also amused and puzzled at the people writing huge tracts on why
PHP is crap while not at the same time acknowledging there are vastly
more
On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 12:49:12AM -, Dean Wilson wrote:
but the recommended solutions
seem to be PHP based if for no other reason than they exist.
I think this is the best summary so far.
Paul
--
Paul Makepeace ... http://paulm.com/
If we were a
Paul == Paul Makepeace [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Paul I am also amused and puzzled at the people writing huge tracts on why
Paul PHP is crap while not at the same time acknowledging there are vastly
Paul more websites written in PHP doing useful things for lots of people than
Paul there are in
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 12:55:22AM +0100, Paul Johnson wrote:
When I looked and asked here a month or so ago there didn't seem an
obvious choice. I wondered about acmemail and sparkle, but eventually
went for SquirrelMail, which is written in php.
I used to run it, but the security cost of
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 02:49:59PM -0800, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
I wish people would stop discovering Mason and discover TT instead.
I wish people would stop discovering TT and discover HTML::Template
instead.
Each to their own I guess.
:-)
Chisel
--
e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Eagles may
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 09:15:15AM +, Chisel Wright ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 02:49:59PM -0800, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
I wish people would stop discovering Mason and discover TT instead.
I wish people would stop discovering TT and discover HTML::Template
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 09:29:58AM +, the hatter wrote:
suggestions. Maybe we should schedule a Mason vs TT footie match at YAPC,
to decide which is superior.
Footie? No.
Mason vs TT vs HTML::Template Naked Wrestling.
--
Lusercop.net - LARTing Lusers everywhere since 2002
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Lusercop wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 09:29:58AM +, the hatter wrote:
suggestions. Maybe we should schedule a Mason vs TT footie match at YAPC,
to decide which is superior.
Footie? No.
Mason vs TT vs HTML::Template Naked Wrestling.
Do you have any particular
At 09:29 29/10/02, the hatter wrote:
I wish people would stop writing tied-in templating systems, and define a
meta-templating system so apps could easily be moved between templating
systems.
I'd say that XML and XSLT fits the bill.
Alex
Openweb Analysts Ltd, London.
Software For Complex
Lusercop wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 09:29:58AM +, the hatter wrote:
suggestions. Maybe we should schedule a Mason vs TT footie match at YAPC,
to decide which is superior.
Footie? No.
Mason vs TT vs HTML::Template Naked Wrestling.
N, I have been to a technical meeting, I know
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 09:32:19AM +, Dave Cross wrote:
Depends what you're doing I guess. At least half of what I do with
templates has nothing at all to do with generating HTML so it makes
no sense to use a templating system that is tied to producing HTML.
I guess the name is
Dave Cross wrote about HTML::Template:
At least half of what I do with
templates has nothing at all to do with generating HTML so it makes
no sense to use a templating system that is tied to producing HTML.
I don't believe that HTML::Template _is_, in fact, tied to producing
HTML. As far as I
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 09:47:50AM +, the hatter wrote:
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Lusercop wrote:
Mason vs TT vs HTML::Template Naked Wrestling.
Do you have any particular template system advocates that you want to see
naked, or should I just express general worry about what perl has done to
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 09:47:50AM +, the hatter wrote:
Do you have any particular template system advocates that you want to see
naked, or should I just express general worry about what perl has done to
your mind ?
It was more that this seems to be the way of settling disputes in the Perl
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 09:29:58AM +, the hatter wrote:
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Chisel Wright wrote:
suggestions. Maybe we should schedule a Mason vs TT footie match at YAPC,
to decide which is superior.
no strict;
print pSince all real programmers know that blinkall templating\n;
print
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 09:57:48AM +, Alex McLintock wrote:
At 09:29 29/10/02, the hatter wrote:
I wish people would stop writing tied-in templating systems, and define a
meta-templating system so apps could easily be moved between templating
systems.
I'd say that XML and XSLT fits the
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Steve Keay wrote:
no strict;
print pSince all real programmers know that blinkall templating\n;
print systems are gay/blink it might be considered fruitless to\n;
print argue over which one is better./p\n;
That'll be mr cantrell and mr keay vs whoever wins the template
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 12:01:59PM +, the hatter wrote:
That'll be mr cantrell and mr keay vs whoever wins the template system
heat - I want a fair fight guys, well-documented code, no unnecessary
golf, the winner is determined by knockout, submission, or by rendering a
template which
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 08:32:31AM +, Roger Burton West wrote:
I used to run it, but the security cost of having PHP
What security cost?
Paul
--
Paul Makepeace ... http://paulm.com/
What is inside myself? Too true.
--
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 12:29:22PM +, Paul Makepeace wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 08:32:31AM +, Roger Burton West wrote:
I used to run it, but the security cost of having PHP
What security cost?
Erm, you do read BUGTRAQ? Even if the only PHP code allowed on the
system is Squirrelmail,
David == David Cantrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David In a previous life, I had to hack with Storyserver. tcl is
David BAD. Anyway, one of my frobnitzes wasn't working, so I emailed
David support@vignette and they told me to keep doubling the number
David of escape characters until it works.
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 12:52:57PM +, Roger Burton West wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 12:29:22PM +, Paul Makepeace wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 08:32:31AM +, Roger Burton West wrote:
I used to run it, but the security cost of having PHP
What security cost?
Erm, you do read
On or about Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 03:35:22PM +, Paul Makepeace typed:
I'd read this as FUD, frankly, until you can show PHP has suffered
vulnerabilities so severe as to require shutting down service every
few weeks.
I'm a professional. I test posted exploits against (and from!) isolated,
Ben == Ben [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ben I am a bit of an XML bigot, though. However, I've just started
Ben looking at XPFE and Mozillas framework stuff, and despite a few
Ben minor annoyances so far, it looks like it might help cure my
Ben XMLophobia a bit.
I believe XML is great for what it
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 03:35:22PM +, Paul Makepeace wrote:
I'd read this as FUD, frankly, until you can show PHP has suffered
vulnerabilities so severe as to require shutting down service every
few weeks.
This might seem anal of me but people might actually take what you're
saying to
[ Curse you `Lusercop', you know I can't resist a PHP-rant... ]
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Lusercop wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 03:35:22PM +, Paul Makepeace wrote:
I'd read this as FUD, frankly, until you can show PHP has suffered
vulnerabilities so severe as to require shutting down
On 29 Oct 2002 06:30:49, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Randal L. Schwartz) said:
However, I hate typing it. I hate having to type /foo when I get
to the ending level. I want to just type a right-paren, watch my
editor flash the corresponding left paren, and be done with it.
This came up in
1 - 100 of 114 matches
Mail list logo
