I have *no* idea what the schedule is yet, but my dad and I may be
heading over to london to see some theatre. Current thinking is
something like the 14-17th.
Hopefully, I'll be able to see some of you if this occurs.
dha
--
David H. Adler - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
At 30/10/2002 08:58 [], David H. Adler wrote:
I have *no* idea what the schedule is yet, but my dad and I may be
heading over to london to see some theatre. Current thinking is
something like the 14-17th.
Hopefully, I'll be able to see some of you if this occurs.
In that case we will have to
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 11:06:37AM +, S. Joel Bernstein wrote:
In that case we will have to have another pubmeet. I hope you Americans
feel some shame for the damage to our livers you're occasioning...
You guys should check your stories. According to Grep we don't know how
to drink. :-)
* David H. Adler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
You guys should check your stories. According to Grep we don't know how
to drink. :-)
Thats right, you keep substituting budweiser and friends where the
beer should be.
Greg
--
Greg McCarroll
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 01:38:40PM -0500, David H. Adler wrote:
I most certainly do *not*. Please do not lump us all together like
that. It's uncomfortable. Hrmf.
... for everyone else.
:-)
--
Lusercop.net - LARTing Lusers everywhere since 2002
On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 07:11:51AM +, Dave Cross wrote:
Unfortunately, I happen to know that the system Nick is working on is
targetting Perl 5.004_04.
Wow, and I thought I had to deal with primitive tools in targeting
5.005003.
Those new-fangled doohickies are so nice, but you never
On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 12:16:30AM +, Nick Cleaton said:
: $CGI::DISABLE_UPLOADS = 1;
: $CGI::DISABLE_UPLOADS = 1;
: $CGI::POST_MAX = 100;
: $CGI::POST_MAX = 100;
There must be a better way, but what ?
{
local $^W = 0;
$CGI::DISABLE_UPLOADS = 1;
On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Simon Wistow wrote:
{
local $^W = 0;
$CGI::DISABLE_UPLOADS = 1;
$CGI::POST_MAX= 100;
}
Never do this without comments.
{
# turn off warnings for this block
# assigning directly to CGI's settings
local $^W = 0;
On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 11:05:49AM +, Simon Wistow wrote:
{
local $^W = 0;
$CGI::DISABLE_UPLOADS = 1;
$CGI::POST_MAX= 100;
}
?
I'm assuming the ? is because you haven't tried it, right?
Didn't wfm on 5.005_03 anyhow.
--
Richard Clamp [EMAIL
On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 11:23:18AM +, Richard Clamp said:
I'm assuming the ? is because you haven't tried it, right?
Didn't wfm on 5.005_03 anyhow.
Yeah, I didn't have quick access to an early Perl. Should have included
more disclaimers.
On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 11:40:39AM +, Simon Wistow wrote:
Yeah, I didn't have quick access to an early Perl. Should have included
more disclaimers.
Is now when I mention it doesn't work on 5.6.1 or blead too?
What are you counting as a non-early Perl?
--
Richard Clamp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 12:39:40PM +, Richard Clamp said:
On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 11:40:39AM +, Simon Wistow wrote:
Yeah, I didn't have quick access to an early Perl. Should have included
more disclaimers.
Is now when I mention it doesn't work on 5.6.1 or blead too?
What are
tests.
It doesn't work because the local $^W = 0; is runtime but
the warning is compile time.
--
Nick
On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 01:03:57PM +, Simon Wistow wrote:
which leads me to suspect that my definition of works is wrong.
No, just your understanding as to why your solution works. By using
CGI you're queering your own test. (See after sig)
Of course that does make me wonder why the OP
the use of CGI.pm defines the symbols, so
you're not going to get a used once warning from them no matter how
hard you prod them.
/me learns something new everyday
First reproduce the bug, then fix it?
Careful how you write tests, lest bugs become Heisenbugs?
Embrace really are quite whiny?
Mine
On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 01:27:58PM +, Simon Wistow wrote:
Ah, I thought that Perl parsed the shebang line even if it was passed
the program as a filename
Yup, you're right, I was wrong. You learn something every day :)
As Richard points out, your solution works because of the 'use CGI'
On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 03:40:53PM +, Nick Cleaton wrote:
The real problem seems to be that the CGI.pm that comes with Perl
5.00404 (version 2.36) doesn't have those variables, so even when
I 'use CGI' I get the warnings under 5.00404.
Ah, but 2.36 doesn't even check those variables, so
Nick Cleaton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: $CGI::DISABLE_UPLOADS = 1;
: $CGI::DISABLE_UPLOADS = 1;
: $CGI::POST_MAX = 100;
: $CGI::POST_MAX = 100;
There must be a better way, but what ?
{
no warnings qw(once);
$CGI::DISABLE_UPLOADS = 1;
$CGI::POST_MAX = 100;
}
..
On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 12:16:30AM +, Nick Cleaton wrote:
: # We don't need file uploads or very large POST requests. Double
: # each line to prevent a 'variable used only once' warning.
: $CGI::DISABLE_UPLOADS = 1;
: $CGI::DISABLE_UPLOADS = 1;
: $CGI::POST_MAX = 100;
: $CGI
* Chris Ball ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
http://printf.net/gnus.jpg
This is a Unix system. I know this. ;-)
--
Greg McCarroll http://217.34.97.146/~gem/
On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 01:02:11AM +, Chris Ball ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Nick Cleaton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: $CGI::DISABLE_UPLOADS = 1;
: $CGI::DISABLE_UPLOADS = 1;
: $CGI::POST_MAX = 100;
: $CGI::POST_MAX = 100;
There must be a better way, but what ?
{
On 14 Jan 2002, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
Possibly. From Carp(3):
perl -MCarp=verbose script.pl
Should enable backtraces on carp/croak/cluck. Assuming
File::Spec::Unix uses them instead of plain old warn...
It's a perl warning (note lower case) that's throwing the warning
of calls to
catfile I'm passing something undefineduh-oh.
So my question iscan I make perl print out a stack trace when it
creates a warning? Can I make it do anything else that will be helpful at
this point.
Thanks.
Mark.
[1] That is until someone writes Acme::UWIG
--
s'' Mark Fowler
* Barry Pretsell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
*Greg wrote:
I feel it is my duty to warn you all of the dangers of the latest
menace to hit the community. Hot on the heels/tires of GTA3 a new
menace is now in our software aisles[1] - I speak of the game that is
called Civilisation 3 (I
On Sun, Nov 25, 2001 at 12:02:15PM -, Barry Pretsell wrote:
I've also got Civ III, and any irrate wife for the same reasons as you.
count me in for a london.pm game,
I feel I have to point out that Civ3 continues the old Civilization
tradition of not having a multiplayer mode. Chances are
Friday, November 23, 2001, 8:32:46 PM, Greg McCarroll wrote:
GM [3] If anyone who does go down this narrow path wants to start a
GM London.pm MP game let me know, it will probably be more popular
GM than 5-aside ;-)
Is MP working in yours? In my (US) copy, there is no MP option.
Poking
* Mike Jarvis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Friday, November 23, 2001, 8:32:46 PM, Greg McCarroll wrote:
GM [3] If anyone who does go down this narrow path wants to start a
GM London.pm MP game let me know, it will probably be more popular
GM than 5-aside ;-)
Is MP working in yours?
Niklas Nordebo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, Nov 25, 2001 at 12:02:15PM -, Barry Pretsell wrote:
I've also got Civ III, and any irrate wife for the same reasons as you.
count me in for a london.pm game,
I feel I have to point out that Civ3 continues the old Civilization
tradition
On Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 10:21:40PM +0100, Jonathan Stowe wrote:
Who is the greater artist ? Scott Bradley or Bach ? Bach was presented
the grand commission and set about his work as a professional and produced
some music that people of the court at the time liked (perhaps) and that
has
29 matches
Mail list logo
