Period
5500 - 3100 BC
=back
compared to, say:
Lower Paleolithic c. 2 Million - 100,000 BC
Middle Paleolithic 100,000 - 30,000 BC
Upper Paleolithic 30,000 - 10,000 BC
Epipaleolithic Era 10000 - c. 5500 BC
Predynastic Period 5500 - 3100 BC
But frankly, I don't see this as a /pressing/ problem.
--
Sean M. Burkehttp://search.cpan.org/~sburke/
e very
dependant on multiline comments (I've seen the Perl 6 RFC).
I think this idea would be really good for Perl 6, because, in my opinion,
POD is lacking.
Lacking how?
--
Sean M. Burkehttp://search.cpan.org/~sburke/
eing the only
Pod parser anyone would ever want to use.
But I wouldn't object if it were the only Pod parser anyone could ever use
-- or at least "=use" with. After all, like XML::Parser (well, plus SAX),
it presents every kind of sane markup interface anyone would ever want.
--
Sean M
where people too often say little more than "I
don't like X about Pod" when they're not talking about Pod at all, but just
some some appalling old version of Pod::Html or Pod::Man. It's like
complaining that Perl doesn't have objects since you never know when you'll
be using Perl 4.
--
Sean M. Burkehttp://search.cpan.org/author/sburke/
omething of the sort into perldpodspec and
Pod::Simple, but didn't see a particularly clean way to have it so that 1)
you wouldn't have to depend on a particular Pod-parsing module, and which
2) could work in cases where the Pod-parser and the formatter are sanely
segregated.
mbol x holds a string, x[2:3] means substr($x,2,1); but
if x holds a list (array), it means @x[2,3]. Similarly, *x is
length($x) or scalar(@x) or scalar(keys %x), depending. And, one I've
always liked: ?x for a string is a random character, and for a list or
table, a random element.
--
Sean M. Burke[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.spinn.net/~sburke/
