2010/12/1 Jason Purdy :
> To add my five cents, the thing that hurts me the most is that Perl is not
> an accepted language when it comes to the differnet new platforms.
>
> Our work has adopted Drupal as a CMS and it's written in PHP. It would be
> awesome if it was written in Perl, but as someone
On 15 April 2010 21:32, Daniel Staal wrote:
>
> On Thu, April 15, 2010 4:09 pm, Eric Wilhelm wrote:
>
>> Honestly, if you're setting up a blank machine next week with less than
>> 5.10, not finding Perl6::Say in the index is going to be the least of
>> your problems anyway. But you should be able
2009/12/13 Rene Schickbauer :
> Hi!
>
> I'm currently writing some tests for my Maplat framework.
>
> Except for really simple tests, having PostgreSQL server and memcached
> installed is quite essential (both cam be started as temporary instances if
> required as long as the binaries are available
2008/6/21 Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> --- Hans Dieter Pearcey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> > never does anything to the importing package
>> >
>> > use Foo::Bar as => Bar;
>> >
>> > plops a constant function Bar into your package. The constant is an
>> > object on which you can do
>> >
>> > Ba
2008/6/20 Hans Dieter Pearcey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 04:19:41PM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote:
>> To be a little more constructive. Here's something that is
>> implementable and I think reasonable.
>>
>> use Foo::Bar;
>>
>> neve
2008/6/20 Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Buried deep within some code, someone used a module (Test::Most 0.03)
> which exports a 'set' function. They weren't actually using that
> module. It was just leftover cruft. Unfortunately, the parent class
> of that module inherited from Class::Accessor.
>
ce-only mode for perl, these days I'm not
actually going to implement this. Most of my coding is in python now
and I miss plenty about Perl but not imports, exports and
really::long::symbol::names::that::have::to::replace::everywhere::if::you::drop::in::a::different::module::with::the::same::inter
2008/6/20 Fergal Daly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 2008/6/20 Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Buried deep within some code, someone used a module (Test::Most 0.03)
>> which exports a 'set' function. They weren't actually using that
>> module. It was just
2008/5/17 David Fleck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I hope someone can help out this novice test writer. I have a module that
> runs several test scripts, and recently they have started to fail on some
> tester's machines. The tests work fine for me, and I can't see anything
> in the Test::More document
You could make the called function mockable
int (*ptr_getaddrinfo)(const char *node, const char *service,
const struct addrinfo *hints,
struct addrinfo **res);
ptr_getaddrinfo = &getaddrinfo
void mock_it(... new_ptr) {
ptr
On 12/10/2007, Bill Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/11/07, A. Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * Eric Wilhelm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-10-11 01:05]:
> > > http://search.cpan.org/~ewilhelm/lambda-v0.0.1/lib/lambda.pm
> >
> > If I saw this in production code under my responsibility
I've never used source filters but if Perl allows you to extract the
post-filtered source code then I'd test that with a whole bunch of
snippets. If not then I'd test the compiled code again expected
compiled code by running both through B::Deparse (or something like
it, demerphq has a module for s
On 28/04/07, Eric Wilhelm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
# from Fergal Daly
# on Saturday 28 April 2007 06:28 am:
>You don't have it as a prereq in Makefile.PL. It's possible the
>machines running the test don't have it installed (people do weird
>things to their p
You don't have it as a prereq in Makefile.PL. It's possible the
machines running the test don't have it installed (people do weird
things to their perl instlls some times),
F
On 28/04/07, Paul LeoNerd Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've got a large number of failures (9 fail vs. 6 pass) on on
On 20/02/07, Shlomi Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Ashley!
On Tuesday 20 February 2007, Ashley Pond V wrote:
> I didn't want to feed this so responded personally to a couple off
> list. Y'all couldn't resist sharing your politics and goofs though so…
> I apologize to the disinterested if thi
On 20/02/07, Arthur Corliss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007, Ashley Pond V wrote:
> I didn't want to feed this so responded personally to a couple off list.
> Y'all couldn't resist sharing your politics and goofs though so… I apologize
> to the disinterested if this just feeds it.
On 19/02/07, imacat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I support the GNU over BSD license, though this is not the subject
here.
On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 12:53:38 -0600
Ken Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 16, 2007, at 1:01 PM, Ashley Pond V wrote:
>* You, are part or, work for an entity th
On 08/02/07, imacat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 01:28:12 -0800
Eric Wilhelm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> # from Andy Lester
> # on Wednesday 07 February 2007 10:25 pm:
> >> I'd just read of Time::Cube, a disjointed rant full of hate speech.
> >> This is the kind of content that
Changing the subject from Keenan to Freeman (James Keenan is not MIA),
F
On 12/01/07, Andy Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12 Jan 2007, at 10:16, David Landgren wrote:
> Do we wait until someone else manifests a need to dust off one of
> th
On 31/12/06, Paul LeoNerd Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, Dec 31, 2006 at 02:13:47AM +, Fergal Daly wrote:
> I think the code about should die comlaining about dies_ok() is
> unknown. So you need to do even more.
No it doesn't... This is one of those things about
On 31/12/06, Paul LeoNerd Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I recently stumbled upon Test::Exception, and wondered if it might make
my test scripts any better.. So far I'm struggling to see any benefit,
for quite a lot of cost.
Without using this module, my tests look like:
eval { code() };
Yeah, I was thinking of applying exactly because it said in all caps
PLEASE DO NOT APPLY IF YOU PERSONALLY DO NOT FULFILL THIS REQUIREMNT
F
On 05/10/06, Andy Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5 Oct 2006, at 16:39, Jonathan Rockway wrote:
> Did anyone else get a message like this via the
On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 12:50:35AM -0800, Austin Schutz wrote:
> I don't know, but I do know that having the interpreter crap out
> is not helpful to most of us simpletons who find phrases like "core dumped"
> not especially user friendly.
If you haven't loaded some external module written i
On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 07:55:36PM -0600, Eric Wilhelm wrote:
> I like the one where you get the mathematically-correct (or at least
> mathematically-useful) infinity.
>
> $perl -le 'use bigint; $x = 1/0; print $x+1'
> inf
>
> $perl -le 'use bigint; $x = 1/0; print 1/$x'
> 0
and what sh
There are two useful things that could come from having some PAUSE
interaction
As an author of several modules, I'd like to be able to tick a box that says
"monitor all forums for my modules" Also, it would be nice if users can see
that the author is monitoring a module, it saves having to post a
On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 09:52:16AM -0400, John Siracusa wrote:
> If module A uses module B, but module B also uses module A, what do I put in
> PREREQ_PM? Will the CPAN shell be able to handle a circular dependency?
I'd say it's a sign that you could factor something out of one or both
modules, d
On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 09:50:22AM +0100, Jose Alves de Castro wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-08-19 at 18:54, Simon Cozens wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jose Alves de Castro) writes:
> > > I don't want to show the results of a search. I want to say "Here is the
> > > link to the module list. See how long it
On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 05:24:57PM +0100, Jose Alves de Castro wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-08-19 at 16:47, Christopher Hicks wrote:
> > On Thu, 19 Aug 2004, Hugh S. Myers wrote:
> >
> > > It seems to me that ANY thing that contributes to the solution set of
> > > 'How do I find the module I'm looking f
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 09:30:47AM -0500, Mark Stosberg wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 10:10:02AM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 06:15:49PM +1200, Sam Vilain wrote:
> > > I nominate the
> > >
> > > Review::*
> > >
> >
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 06:15:49PM +1200, Sam Vilain wrote:
> I nominate the
>
> Review::*
>
> Namespace for author-submitted module indexes and in-depth reviews, in
> POD format. I think this has a number of advantages. Let's use the
> infrastructure we already have, no?
Interesting, but w
On Sat, Jul 17, 2004 at 11:40:02AM -0500, Ken Williams wrote:
> Well, I actually don't think we need a place for keywords *anywhere*,
> but if we have them somewhere, then yeah, I do think it's good to be
> able to see them in the pod. Something like they are here (random
> academic paper in my
On Sat, Jul 17, 2004 at 03:40:52PM +0200, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> Which was exactly the purpose: to be able to make sure that the
> list with official keywords really does only contain official
> keywords, so a release tool can complain about misspellings f.ex.
> If you simply allow both in a single
On Sat, Jul 17, 2004 at 01:32:36PM +0200, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> * Randy W. Sims <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-07-17 12:45]:
> > There is, however, another advantage to the catagory approach:
> > Searching would likely be more consistent. It would help
> > authors to place their modules so that they can
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 10:34:08PM +0100, Tim Bunce wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 06:30:59PM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote:
> > XML::HTTP::Network::Daemon::TextProcessing::Business::Papersize::GIS
> >
> > so that people can find it,
>
> That's what the Desc
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 06:08:16PM +0100, Leon Brocard wrote:
> Simon Cozens sent the following bits through the ether:
>
> > The searching in search.cpan.org is, unfortunately, pretty awful. At some
> > point I plan to sit down and try using Plucene as a search engine for
> > module data.
>
> I
On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 06:39:22PM -0300, SilvioCVdeAlmeida wrote:
> Let's write it better:
> 1. FORBID any module without a meaningful readme with all its (possibly
> recursive) dependencies, its pod and any other relevant information
> inside.
Having the dependencies easily visible is a good ide
Hi all,
One of my modules has a failure noted against it that was caused by the
tester's wonky Perl installation. How can this be removed?
F
On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 12:05:02PM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> All volunteer organisations work in roughly the same way - if you want to
> get a job done, you have to *start* it yourself. Others may well join in
> and help once they see that it's a good idea, but things don't get started
> becau
On Sat, Apr 03, 2004 at 01:37:03AM +0200, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Coming soon to Devel::Cover (well, on my TODO list anyway):
>
> - Provide an optimal test ordering as far as coverage is concerned - ie
>tests which provide a large increase in coverage in a short time are
>preferred. There
On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 04:59:41PM -0600, Andy Lester wrote:
> > Even if you have a smoke bot, you presumably run the tests (depends on the
> > size of the suite I suppose) before a checkin and it's convenient to know
> > that the first failure message you see if the most relevant (ie at the
> > lo
On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 02:51:11PM -0600, Andy Lester wrote:
> > coded correctly. So it's desirable to see the results of the lower level
> > tests first because running the higer level tests could be a waste of time.
>
> But how often does that happen? Why bother coding to optimize the
> failure
On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 01:52:12PM -0600, Andy Lester wrote:
> > No. But there are certain classes of functions of the module that don't
> > work until others have been run. So others should have been tested
>
> So some tests are setting up other ones, then?
I don't think Tims is writing tests
I saw that on p5p. It seems to be an idea who's time has come!
John has taken a different approach. A is compatible with B if A >= B (for the
standard version meaning of >=) and it hasn't been specifically declared
incompatible.
An upside is that you can give a reason why the current version is
On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 11:52:45AM +, Adrian Howard wrote:
> >This should be less error prone and easier to maintain.
> [snip]
>
> Hmmm... I'm not so sure that that's always (or even mostly) true.
At the moment the information must be maintained separately by each module's
user (if they can b
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 03:02:53PM +0100, khemir nadim wrote:
> What I meant is that we shouldn't have two ways (and 2 places) of telling
> what we need for our modules to work.
I agree, there should be only one place where Some::Module's compatibility
information is declared, whether that's in So
On Thursday 29 January 2004 19:50, Graciliano M. P. wrote:
> I'm working on a module that make a bridge between the R-project
> "intepreter" and Perl. Actually I need to have this done today, soo, I will
> ask for a fast reply. Thanks in advance.
It would help if we knew what the R-Project was,
F
(I think). Most module authors I
> think are pretty good about documenting what they change in the Changes
> file.
>
> Lincoln
>
>
> On Wed, 2004-01-28 at 00:28, David Manura wrote:
> > Fergal Daly wrote:
> >
> > > On Saturday 24 January 2004 18:27, Dav
Hi Nadim,
The difference is that Module::Build forces the Foo::Bar's author to work
out what current versions of Some::Module and Other::Module are suitable and
to try to predict what future version will still be compatible. This is time
consuming and error prone (predicting the future isn't easy)
On Wednesday 28 January 2004 05:28, David Manura wrote:
> I'm not sure branching maps cleanly onto the interface versioning scheme as
> shown above. Let's say you have 1.2. You then branch to 1.2.1.1 => 1.2.
> Meanwhile, in your main trunk, you create 1.3 => 1.2. OK, now back in the
> branch,
On Saturday 24 January 2004 18:27, David Manura wrote:
> (1) All code that works with Version A will also work with subsequent Version B.
> (e.g. adding new functions)
>
> (2) There exists code that works with Version A but will not work with Version
> B. (e.g. changing existing function signatu
On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 01:36:48AM -0500, David Manura wrote:
> Fergal,
>
> I like what Version::Split is attempting to do (triggering a compile time
> error if a newer version of a module could result in logic errors) and how
> it does it (overriding the VERSION method). Perl6 RFC78 seems to ad
king about this for a while, had a quick rant about it on the
module-authors mailing list, followed by a chat where the VERSION method
was
pointed out.
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg01542.html
SEE ALSO
Module::Build, ExtUtils::MakeMaker, only, version.
AUTH
Check out Version::Split
http://www.fergaldaly.com/computer/Version-Split/
which does what I'm talking about. It's a terrible name, any better ones?
It answers many of the questions you asked, the others are below.
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 08:41:35PM -0600, david nicol wrote:
> Q: was this sugge
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 10:07:43PM -0500, David Manura wrote:
> In consideration of what Fergal said, should every public method or
> function in a module be individually versioned? So, when I do
>
> use Text::Balanced qw(extract_multiple extract_codeblock), 1.95;
>
> this could (under new se
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 11:12:25PM -0600, david nicol wrote:
> Here's a controversial assertion:
>
> Just because Damian Conway does something that doesn't make it right.
It certainly doesn't but he's not alone in doing it.
Just to come clean, I was never really bitten by the Parse::RecDescent
c
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 03:53:34AM -0500, Terrence Brannon wrote:
> I am author maintainer of the Parse::RecDescent::FAQ - what happened
> vis-a-vis version compatibility? I have been far away from the mechanics
> of Parse::RecDescent for quite awhile.
>
> And yes, please email me something that
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 10:26:30AM -0500, Mark Stosberg wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 12:23:09PM +0000, Fergal Daly wrote:
> >
> > Not that this would ever be agreed upon, the old way is ingrained. Modules
> > will continue to do for example
> >
> > PREREQ_
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 12:17:51PM +0100, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> Perl does not provide for keeping around same-named modules that
> differ in some other way.
That's not true. There are many modules where for example version 1.xx has
one interface and 2.xx has a different interface and then 2.xx whe
On Saturday 13 December 2003 20:39, David Robins wrote:
> parse() will return:
> 0 on completion of request (call request() to get the request, call data()
to
> get any extra data)
> >0 meaning we want (at least - may want more later if we're using chunked
> encoding) that many bytes
> -1 meanin
On Tuesday 02 December 2003 20:41, Lars Thegler wrote:
> On Monday, December 01, 2003 11:24 AM, Fergal Daly wrote:
> Obviously, if the numbers are of variable length, then we have a different
> situation, that cannot easily be handled this way. Maybe I should check $lo
> and $hi to ens
On Sun, Nov 30, 2003 at 05:17:10PM +0100, Lars Thegler wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've written a small module, encapsulating an algorithm that can generate a
> set of 'prefixes' (patterns that match the beginning of a numeric string)
> from an 'interval' (range) of integers. This is a problem often occu
re-usable module of yours, then it should
> be put under
> that module's namespace, instead of putting it under a non-related
> namespace.
>
> --
> sherzod
>
>
> : -Original Message-
> : From: Fergal Daly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> :
On Thursday 13 November 2003 22:34, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> I'm not particularly excited about the idea, but it's better than
> duplication. I really like the Authors:: idea, although I'm not
> sure that name is good.
>
> However, the ::MM bit really irks me. If anything, please make
> the name mean
Is there, or should there be a namespace for each author? Somewhere I can put
modules that I don't consider worth releasing but that I do use in some of my
released modules? For instance I have a very simple method maker that I
wouldn't expect anyone else to use and I don't want to bother writin
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 05:17:28PM +, Simon Cozens wrote:
> Randy W. Sims:
> > Sounds like a set/multiset/bag structure.
>
> I thought it sounded more like a sorted array, but I'm prepared to be
> persuaded otherwise. (Primarily because I've already released the module
> to CPAN. ;)
I think t
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 11:02:34AM +0100, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> Even disregarding these differences, your code needs a lot of
> additions before it becomes useful in practice. The most glaring
> definiciency is that there's no provision for deleting an object
> instance's data from the hash on obje
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 05:58:25PM +0100, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> Read it too. My point is that the method would be accessible from
> a much broader scope (ie globally, really) than would the
> attribute hash in Yves' code (stricly local to the method).
Yes, _all_ methods are globally accessible.
A
On Thursday 30 October 2003 21:51, Struan Donald wrote:
> > HTML::Validator::W3C
>
> Which is going to get confused with HTML::Validator and also I think
> you need to make sure people know it's a web thing.
Sorry, should have been
HTML::Validate::W3C
that way you're in a clean namespace. I kne
On Thursday 30 October 2003 18:24, Dave Rolsky wrote:
> Well, sort of. It messes with the symbol table of the dynamically
> constructed "child", which ends up with each parents methods. I don't
> really want to do that. I want to be able to have any of the intermediate
> classes call SUPER::foo(
If you can get the source then why bother putting it on a server, wrapping it
in SOAP and calling it remotely?
F
On Tuesday 28 October 2003 20:15, Sherzod Ruzmetov wrote:
> Here is what you should do.
>
> You need to download the source code of the actual validator that W3C uses
> and
> design
On Sunday 05 October 2003 17:23, Eric Wilhelm wrote:
> > The following was supposedly scribed by
> > Fergal Daly
> > on Sunday 05 October 2003 06:54 am:
>
> >That said, having a single package so full of stuff that you need to split
> > it into sub files is oft
There aren't any technical issues in using one file for methods, one for
constants, one for helper functions etc but it would be a bit of a surprise
to anyone who is used to a strong correspondence between file names and
package names.
That said, having a single package so full of stuff that yo
On Tuesday 05 August 2003 14:05, Iain 'Spoon' Truskett wrote:
> A format using the META.yml file has sprung up.
This works for new releases of modules but it depends on people using it so it
does nothing for the current issues with search.cpan.org.
Looking at 02packages.details.txt, I see Test::
On Sunday 03 August 2003 17:45, Andy Lester wrote:
> There's a distro on CPAN now called lcwa that I would love to see
> disappear. It's from 1997 and it's one of those distros that
> included all its necessary parts rather than rely on depencies.
> Unfortunately, those parts are 6 years out of da
On Saturday 28 June 2003 02:51, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> When I merged Test::Simple with Test::More I left a Test-More tarball lying
> around containing a Makefile.PL which simply died saying "download
> Test-Simple instead".
That's OK for a merge (or you could have an empty archive with a depen
On Friday 20 June 2003 20:21, Ken Williams wrote:
> Second, I find it very confusing that all these different capabilities
> are happening inside one cmp_deeply() function. In Perl it's much more
> common to use the function/operator to indicate how comparisons will be
> done - for example, <=>
On Thursday 19 June 2003 15:48, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Sounds a little like Test::Differences. I don't suppose there is any
> chance of integration or anything?
If Test::Deep was purely for checking if 2 structures are identical then
Test::Differences would be fine but Test::Deep also allows you
On Thursday 19 June 2003 15:24, Andy Lester wrote:
> It would be nice if the functions ended in _ok, so it's clear that
> they are actually outputting and not just returning booleans.
There is only 1 function really, all the rest are shortcuts to the
constructors of various plugins. I suppose I
On Thursday 19 June 2003 16:18, Matt Seddon wrote:
> But File::.*::Info feels like the Right Thing :)
>
> File::BinObj::Info?
> File::BinaryObject::Info?
At the moment your only module is the PE module and that deals with a binary
format but that's not to say that future modules won't deal with
On Thursday 19 June 2003 15:15, Enrico Sorcinelli wrote:
> Why not to hack into Test::More in order to improve it and fix its bugs?
> Test::More is often used and I think that your patches will be welcome!
I did, my patches were accepted by Michael Schwern months ago but he hasn't
released a new
On Thursday 19 June 2003 06:55, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> From what I understand the Test namespace is intended for modules that are
> meant to test Perl code for bugs (Test, Test::More, Test::Simple,
> Test::Harness, etc.). I think your module belongs somewhere under Data.
> Like Data::Test::Deep or wh
Hi,
I already have Test::Deep on CPAN and I want to officialise the namespace so
I thought I should run it by this list before mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://search.cpan.org/author/FDALY/Test-Deep/
Test::Deep allows you to check that a complex data structure contains the
right stuff.
I have a module for building Perl expression as a tree which can then be
dumped out as Perl eg.
my $tree = trav(hash("key"), array(10), method("getName", hash('other')));
print "perl: ".$tree->perl('$var')."\n";
perl: $var->{"key"}->[10]->getName($var->{"other"})
It's currently part of (yet ano
Sorry to bring this up again, I should have chased it more the last time but
what exactly is UNIXy about about this module?
The reason given previously was that all the dialog programs run on UNIX. That
seems fairly incidental, it's not like there can't be dialog be programs for
windows, Mac, A
84 matches
Mail list logo
