Gah! That's what I get for using comments! ;-)
Darn right, stop that! Code is hard to write, it should be hard to
read, too! ;-)
8-)
That's what I like about perl.
Anyway, I'm aware that slice is not a function, just surprised that
neither the concept nor the syntax seems to get any treatmen
On Apr 16, 2004, at 9:49 PM, Joel Rees wrote:
So, I'm wondering about that version number. 5.8.1 is still the latest
stable Perl, right?
No, 5.8.3 is the latest.
sherm--
On Apr 16, 2004, at 7:01 PM, Sherm Pendley wrote:
So, I'm wondering about that version number. 5.8.1 is still the
latest stable Perl, right?
No, 5.8.3 is the latest.
And 5.8.4 will likely be out within a week.
Regards,
David
So, I'm wondering about that version number. 5.8.1 is still the
latest stable Perl, right?
No, 5.8.3 is the latest.
And 5.8.4 will likely be out within a week.
So, given an iBook that is going to host my personal site, should I
load 5.8.3 parallel to the the 5.6 in Mac OS 10.2, or should I stick
On Apr 16, 2004, at 11:54 PM, Joel Rees wrote:
So, given an iBook that is going to host my personal site, should I
load 5.8.3 parallel to the the 5.6 in Mac OS 10.2, or should I stick
with 5.8.1?
I'm a bit puzzled about that "stick with 5.8.1" phrase - on 10.2,
there's no pre-installed 5.8.1 to
On Apr 16, 2004, at 8:54 PM, Joel Rees wrote:
(Purpose of the parallel load is to keep the one used by the system
more-or-less pristine, of course. Purpose of 5.8 is Unicode and large
character sets.)
If your making much us of Unicode, you should absolutely run the latest
5.8.x.
Regards,
Davi
On Sat, 17 Apr 2004, Sherm Pendley wrote:
> In fact, unless you're in a *huge* hurry, I'd say wait a week and go
> with 5.8.4.
I thought even numbered point releases were unstable, test releases.
Is that not the case?
--
Chris Devers
On Apr 17, 2004, at 8:57 AM, Chris Devers wrote:
I thought even numbered point releases were unstable, test releases.
The other way around. The odd numbered releases are the development
track. (When you try to run some script against them, something goes
wrong and you say "oh, that seems odd!")
> "Chris" == Chris Devers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Chris> On Sat, 17 Apr 2004, Sherm Pendley wrote:
>> In fact, unless you're in a *huge* hurry, I'd say wait a week and go
>> with 5.8.4.
Chris> I thought even numbered point releases were unstable, test releases.
Chris> Is that not the cas
Andrew M. Langmead wrote:
> On Apr 17, 2004, at 8:57 AM, Chris Devers wrote:
>
>
>>I thought even numbered point releases were unstable, test releases.
>>
>
>
> The other way around. The odd numbered releases are the development
> track. (When you try to run some script against them, somethin
On Apr 17, 2004, at 4:39 PM, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
Wrong. Ponie is off the chart, or maybe more like 5.11,
That's one louda, innit?
On 2004.4.17, at 11:45 PM, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
It's the 5.9.x track that has the experimentation. 5.8.x (like 5.6.x
before it) are for slightly-behind-bleeding-edge adopters. Hardcore
trailing edge adopters are still using Perl4 (which is also an even
number :).
So, on Tuesday's, when I'm i
Hi Joel,
I know where you can get an AS400 for the taking. Then you can really
hack away like old times. Maybe you can find a card reader for it?
Joe.
On Apr 18, 2004, at 8:54 PM, Joel Rees wrote:
On 2004.4.17, at 11:45 PM, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
It's the 5.9.x track that has the experiment
David Wheeler wrote:
> On Apr 17, 2004, at 4:39 PM, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
>
>
>>Wrong. Ponie is off the chart, or maybe more like 5.11,
>
>
> That's one louda, innit?
I just wonder who's the drummer.
--
Jarkko Hietaniemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.iki.fi/jhi/ "There is this special
On Apr 18, 2004, at 5:05 PM, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
That's one louda, innit?
I just wonder who's the drummer.
Let's just keep Arthur away from thunderstorms, shall we? ;-)
David
15 matches
Mail list logo
