Re: Module for simple processing of log files

2005-03-29 Thread David Landgren
Philippe 'BooK' Bruhat wrote: Hi, [...] The module works like this: use Blah;# not a very good name for CPAN :-) Acme::Blah! :o) my $blah = Blah-new( delimiter = ':', fields= [qw( bap clank glipp plop )], show = \show_my_data, ); # quelques

Re: Module for simple processing of log files

2005-03-29 Thread Philippe 'BooK' Bruhat
Le mardi 29 mars 2005 à 19:05, David Landgren écrivait: $blah-add_filter( bap = 'eq zlopp', clank = '!~ /clunk_eth/', A hash is unordered. Um hang on, or is this a list of pairs or a hash? It is a list of pairs. For the moment, the right part is pushed on an array

Re: Module for simple processing of log files

2005-03-29 Thread Philippe 'BooK' Bruhat
Le mardi 29 mars 2005 à 17:52, Orton, Yves écrivait: Any other name ideas or comments about the module and its interface? I started working on a project like this but never got around to finishing it. I called it Generic Record Processing System IE GRPS. The point being that this isnt a

Re: Should DSLIP codes be updated?

2005-03-29 Thread Ricardo SIGNES
* Robert Rothenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-03-29T14:16:11] Some food for thought and debate. I'm wondering if the DSLIP codes [1] be updated, if revamped altogether. Note the following issues: I vote for eliminated. -- rjbs pgpxUKHHyPWvh.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: Should DSLIP codes be updated?

2005-03-29 Thread Tim Bunce
On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 03:06:33PM -0600, Andy Lester wrote: On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 07:16:11PM +, Robert Rothenberg ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Some food for thought and debate. I'm wondering if the DSLIP codes [1] be updated, if revamped altogether. Note the following issues: Or

Re: Should DSLIP codes be updated?

2005-03-29 Thread Andy Lester
On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 11:06:37PM +0100, Tim Bunce ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Or thrown away entirely, along with the rest of the the archaic idea of a module list. The Module List is dead. Module Registration is different. Mea culpa. I'll rephrase. Or thrown away entirely, along with

Re: Should DSLIP codes be updated?

2005-03-29 Thread Tim Bunce
On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 04:14:46PM -0600, Andy Lester wrote: On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 11:06:37PM +0100, Tim Bunce ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Or thrown away entirely, along with the rest of the the archaic idea of a module list. The Module List is dead. Module Registration is different.

Re: Should DSLIP codes be updated?

2005-03-29 Thread Robert Rothenberg
On 29/03/2005 22:14 Andy Lester wrote: Mea culpa. I'll rephrase. Or thrown away entirely, along with the rest of the archaic idea of module registration. The time has come to recognize that CPAN is an unregulated free-for-all, and that the existing way of trying to wrap our heads around its

Re: Should DSLIP codes be updated?

2005-03-29 Thread Mark Stosberg
On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 11:03:09PM +, Robert Rothenberg wrote: I'm sympathetic to the idea, but some of the information in DSLIP is useful and shouldn't be thrown away (such as how supported, alpha/beta/mature, and license). What isn't in META.yml should go there. I'm much less

Re: Module for simple processing of log files

2005-03-29 Thread Philippe 'BooK' Bruhat
Le mardi 29 mars 2005 à 17:52, Orton, Yves écrivait: I started working on a project like this but never got around to finishing it. I called it Generic Record Processing System IE GRPS. The point being that this isnt a facility related to parsing log files, its a facility relating to