* Dave Rolsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-07-14 03:25]:
Ah, so you reinvented DateTime::Format::Duration.
Actually, I think he reinvented Time::Seconds, which is part of
the Time::Piece distro.
Well, both, I guess. Goes to show how many, *many* people have
written this sort of thing before in
Actually, I think he reinvented Time::Seconds, which is part of
the Time::Piece distro.
No guys, Time::Seconds doesn't give the same answer my module does. Time::Seconds
converts seconds entirely in minutes or hours or
days or etc. For example, it says that 7341 seconds are:
2,03916 hours
Enh, sorta. Most of the work of Time::Duration is figuring out how to
whittle down a multiple-units expression of a time to a particular degree
of concision. It also doesn't have the concept of month. You're
probably better off just starting over, since stuff like $mins
=
On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 09:01:30PM -0300, Bruno Negr?o wrote:
Ah, so you reinvented DateTime::Format::Duration.
use DateTime::Format::Duration;
my $fmt = DateTime::Format::Duration-new(
pattern = '%H hours, %M minutes, %S seconds',
normalize = 1,
);
I would rather see more standardization on the use of the DateTime
project, in much the same way that people think of DBI when they think
of accessing databases through Perl.
In this case, perhaps some clear documentation and examples (just like
the one above) would be the best solution. I
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 01:24:43PM -0300, Bruno Negr?o wrote:
I agree Mark, i've posted my module on the DateTime mailing list. Let's see what
they say about it.
But i think the DateTime project is not gaining fair promotion once their modules
are not even appearing on the main Module
Andrew savige [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
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
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Stosberg) writes:
I think part of the solution to fix that is to have more contributions to the
CPAN ratings system, and consider the ratings in the search results.
The searching in search.cpan.org is, unfortunately, pretty awful. At some
point I plan to sit down and
I think there is a separate more general issue that the module list is
losing relevance. I think a lot of people (like myself), use
http://search.cpan.org as a primary method for finding useful modules.
As a CPAN user, I don't consult the list when looking for modules. As
a module writer, I
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 thought that would be a good idea too, so I tried it. It works
*fairly* well.
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Bruno Negrão wrote:
I would rather see more standardization on the use of the DateTime
project, in much the same way that people think of DBI when they think
of accessing databases through Perl.
In this case, perhaps some clear documentation and examples (just like
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 thought
* Dave Rolsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-07-14 19:26]:
Some of them _are_ registered, but that document you're
referring to hasn't been regenerated since 2002/08/27! I wish
the CPAN folks would just remove it if it won't be generated
regularly.
Does anyone else here think that the list should
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
* Dave Rolsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-07-14 19:26]:
Some of them _are_ registered, but that document you're
referring to hasn't been regenerated since 2002/08/27! I wish
the CPAN folks would just remove it if it won't be generated
regularly.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scott W Gifford) writes:
It would be interesting to calculate the importance of a module by
how many other modules link to it, either via a use statement or by
reference in the POD, much like Google does with Web page links.
Someone's already done this for CPAN, but I can't
* Dave Rolsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-07-14 19:41]:
Does anyone else here think that the list should probably
just be done away with entirely?
Given the fact that most authors seem to not register their
stuff, the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list is slow as heck, and that the
web pages never get
* Scott W Gifford [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-07-14 19:38]:
It would be interesting to calculate the importance of a
module by how many other modules link to it, either via a use
statement or by reference in the POD, much like Google does
with Web page links.
I was thinking the same thing, and I
Fergal Daly wrote:
Does META.yaml have a place for keyowrds?
The spec doesn't currently provide for keywords. I do think it would be
a good idea, BUT I think it needs to be done in a way to avoid abuse.
I'd hate to see META.yml files grow by the kb as authors add every
conceivable keyword they
On Jul 14, 2004, at 12:11, Randy W. Sims wrote:
Fergal Daly wrote:
Does META.yaml have a place for keyowrds?
As limiting and as clumsy as it seems, I think that if keywords are
added then it should be from a limited set of keywords, i.e. more of a
classification scheme, really, where modules can
* Randy W. Sims ml-perl at thepierianspring.org [2004/07/14 15:11]:
Fergal Daly wrote:
Does META.yaml have a place for keyowrds?
The spec doesn't currently provide for keywords.
Is anyone generating META.yaml files by hand? I thought they were all
generated (and regenerated) by
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 03:11:11PM -0400, Randy W. Sims wrote:
Fergal Daly wrote:
Does META.yaml have a place for keyowrds?
The spec doesn't currently provide for keywords. I do think it would be
a good idea, BUT I think it needs to be done in a way to avoid abuse.
I'd hate to see
Matthew Sachs wrote:
On Jul 14, 2004, at 12:11, Randy W. Sims wrote:
Fergal Daly wrote:
Does META.yaml have a place for keyowrds?
As limiting and as clumsy as it seems, I think that if keywords are
added then it should be from a limited set of keywords, i.e. more of a
classification scheme,
Mark Stosberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
The search algorithm could pay attention to the first X keywords and
ignore the rest. Or at least, it could heavily weight the first few.
I think this is part of how search engines prevent the same kind of
above of the meta-tag keyword system.
Hello,
I gave a talk at the French Perl Workshop in June about some work I was
doing to produce really large (i.e. length($re) 5) regular
expressions for Postfix access maps. (Postfix can be compiled with the
PCRE library). A number of people expressed interest in the approach and
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 06:30:59PM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote:
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
Sounds like cool stuff!
David Landgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
2. Is Regexp::Trie a good name? (I fall into the regexp is spelt with
a p camp, but if Regex is preferred that's fine by me. I can never
remember which, if either, is deprecated).
There are 688 modules with Regex in
On 7/14/2004 5:29 PM, David Landgren wrote:
Hello,
I gave a talk at the French Perl Workshop in June about some work I was
doing to produce really large (i.e. length($re) 5) regular
expressions for Postfix access maps. (Postfix can be compiled with the
PCRE library). A number of people
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 12:40:03PM -0500, Dave Rolsky wrote:
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
* Dave Rolsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-07-14 19:26]:
Some of them _are_ registered, but that document you're
referring to hasn't been regenerated since 2002/08/27! I wish
the CPAN
Randy W. Sims wrote:
[...]
3. Is the lexer namespace a good idea? Or is there a better way do to
this? I'm open to any design suggestions on this issue since nothing
is written yet.
What about Japhy's new Regexp::Parser ?
Hmm. Yes, I've know about it, and even downloaded it to play with it
* David Landgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-07-14 23:30]:
1. Has this been done before (i.e. shoot me now and put me out
of my misery).
I haven't particularly looked for such a thing, but nor have I
heard of it. And I've been around mentions of ::PreSuf so often
that I think it reasonable to
On 7/14/2004 5:51 PM, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 12:40:03PM -0500, Dave Rolsky wrote:
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
* Dave Rolsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-07-14 19:26]:
Some of them _are_ registered, but that document you're
referring to hasn't been regenerated since
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 Description field is for.
There's a Description
Fergal Daly wrote:
Does META.yaml have a place for keyowrds?
The spec doesn't currently provide for keywords. I do think it would be
a good idea, BUT I think it needs to be done in a way to avoid abuse.
I'd hate to see META.yml files grow by the kb as authors add every
conceivable keyword they
On Jul 14, David Landgren said:
Randy W. Sims wrote:
What about Japhy's new Regexp::Parser ?
Hmm. Yes, I've know about it, and even downloaded it to play with it
this weekend. But wrote tests instead :)
I uploaded v0.10 the other day. It's got a much better hierarchy system
(read: one that
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Randy W. Sims wrote:
As for the best of the best, I still believe there is a lot of merrit in
the list built from dependencies idea.
Only in some areas. For example, the top templating modules are probably,
TT, HTML::Template, Mason. How many modules depend on any of
35 matches
Mail list logo
