On Fri, 26 Jan 2001 16:37:23 -0500, Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
from what I remember we discussed
an idea to allow people and organizations to produce their own list of
approved modules.
This is already possible with the CPAN::Site module.
For example, if Oracle had
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andreas J. Koenig) writes:
On Fri, 26 Jan 2001 16:37:23 -0500, Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
from what I remember we discussed
an idea to allow people and organizations to produce their own list of
approved modules.
This is already possible with the
Hi,
I read RFC195 suggesting to drop 'chop' and go with 'chomp'.
What does 'chop' have anything to do with 'chomp'?
I'm totally oppose to that. Consider:
my $s;
map { /\S/ $s .= "$_ " } split(/\s+/,@_);
chop($s);
return $s;
Thanks,
Marc K.
Larry mumbled something like "implements" and "interface". So to say
package Net::FTP::Foo implements Net::FTP;
But I don't think, anybody wrote an RFC about the plan.
I did. Or something like it. And I've got a couple of modules on CPAN
(that I really must document better)
On Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 03:42:43PM -0700, root wrote:
I read RFC195 suggesting to drop 'chop' and go with 'chomp'.
What does 'chop' have anything to do with 'chomp'?
chop() and chomp() are very often confused due to their similar names,
similar functionality and the fact that chop() did
Jarkko Hietaniemi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Larry mumbled something like "implements" and "interface". So to say
package Net::FTP::Foo implements Net::FTP;
But I don't think, anybody wrote an RFC about the plan.
I did. Or something like it. And I've got a couple of
On Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 05:13:23PM -0500, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 03:42:43PM -0700, root wrote:
I read RFC195 suggesting to drop 'chop' and go with 'chomp'.
What does 'chop' have anything to do with 'chomp'?
chop() and chomp() are very often confused due to their
I like the final point:
Stay tuned, I'm sure I'll have found something new to hate by tomorrow.
(Well, that's how this document originally ended. But it's not true,
because I'm back to hacking in C, since it's the still only way to
ship portable programs.)
--
$jhi++; #
J. David Blackstone wrote:
And in related news, it's a total pain that one can't iterate over the
contents of an array without knowing intimate details about its
contents: you have to know whether it's byte[], or int[], or Object[].
That's one nice thing about Perl; you can foreach
J. David Blackstone wrote:
That's one nice thing about Perl; you can foreach over
an array of all sorts of different things. In fact, being able to
just have an array of all sorts of different things is something Perl
still has over Java, C, and the like.
It's not that big a deal. An
On Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 01:26:09AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 05:13:23PM -0500, Michael G Schwern wrote:
This one not only modifies its arguments (or $_ when called without),
it also has the right prototype and works on lists:
sub chop (@) {
my $__;
11 matches
Mail list logo
