Andrew savige [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
So far this node has been ignored and downvoted.
I saw that, well that's life.
I suggest you start by creating a perl monks account (rather than
posting anonymously). Then hang around for a while to get a feel
for how
Randy W. Sims [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hmm, we have:
1) Simon's code review ladder:
http://lists.netthink.co.uk/listinfo/code-review-ladder
Seems rather dead to me. A very interresting link anyhow. Let's see if we
can get more life there
2) Ask's
Recently on perlmonks.com I have posted a prototype of Perl embeded into
Java (#372197=Embeding Perl into Java to use CPAN modules directly from
Java), as a simplier alternative for JPL (not any more in development). One
advantage over JPL is that PLJava works on Win32.
Now I have finished the
Hi all,
I've made a new module, I'm thinking to call it Time::Seconds::GroupedBy. It
is designed to convert an amount of seconds in other time units. I'm calling
time units SECONDS, MINUTES, HOURS, DAYS, MONTHS, and YEARS . The user
defines which will be the time unit to group the amount of
Hi
all,I've made a new module, I'm thinking to call it
Time::Seconds::GroupedBy. Itis designed to convert an amount of seconds in
other time units. I'm callingtime units SECONDS, MINUTES, HOURS, DAYS,
MONTHS, and YEARS . The userdefines which will be the time unit to group the
amount of
Hi
all,I've made a new module, I'm thinking to call it
Time::Seconds::GroupedBy. Itis designed to convert an amount of seconds in
other time units. I'm callingtime units SECONDS, MINUTES, HOURS, DAYS,
MONTHS, and YEARS . The userdefines which will be the time unit to group the
amount of
Is there any reason to use it in preference to DateTime::Duration?
Hi Aristotle,
My module differs from DateTime::Duration because it is not dealing with dates. It
does not try to foresee which is a future of past
date based in a bunch of seconds.
It just provide a means to calculate a time
Hi Graciliano,
That sounds really cool. Have you played with Inline::Java 0.49, which
also added the ability to call perl from Java? I'm sure Patrick would
be interested to see how your approaches are similar and how they're
different.
-Ken
On Jul 13, 2004, at 4:06 AM, Graciliano M. P.
* Bruno Negrão [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-07-13 23:53]:
Hi Aristotle,
My module differs from DateTime::Duration because it is not
dealing with dates. It does not try to foresee which is a
future of past date based in a bunch of seconds.
It just provide a means to calculate a time quantity
khemir nadim wrote:
I'd love to review the second module that is offered for sacrifice ;-)
Anything to offer?
How about Apache::MVC? It was posted for review on Simon's code review
ladder mailing list in February but didn't get any response AFAICT.
What has been harming this list, IMHO, is
Hm
It just provide a means to calculate a time quantity that is
more human readable than a big number of seconds.
You mean, it deals with a... duration?
Can I call it time quantity?! ;-)
Ah, so you reinvented DateTime::Format::Duration.
use DateTime::Format::Duration;
my
On 7/13/2004 8:01 PM, Bruno Negrão wrote:
Oh, what a sadness. Indeed i never saw the DateTime project before.
But still my module is far easier to use than DateTime::Format::Duration.
Do you believe it is worth to publish it in Time::Seconds::GroupBy?
Not sadness, experience. Actually this was an
Seems related to, and an extension of, Time::Duration.
Perhaps you could extend that module rather than create a new one.
Yes, really were addressing the same problem. However, Time::Duration doesn't output
the time numbers separately, instead, it throws
a static string written in english
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
Ah, so you reinvented DateTime::Format::Duration.
Actually, I think he reinvented Time::Seconds, which is part of the
Time::Piece distro.
-dave
/*===
House Absolute Consulting
www.houseabsolute.com
===*/
Randy W. Sims wrote:
Hmm, we have:
1) Simon's code review ladder:
http://lists.netthink.co.uk/listinfo/code-review-ladder
2) Ask's CPAN Ratings: http://cpanratings.perl.org/
3) Perl Monks' Reviews: http://www.perlmonks.org/index.pl?node=Reviews
Each has a slightly different focus,
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Andrew Savige wrote:
I suppose all the above sites could do with more quality content. Bottom
line: a quality review is unpaid work taking considerable time and
effort; there will always be a shortage of them. Notice that Uri Guttman
offers a commerical code review
16 matches
Mail list logo
