On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 4:25 PM, Jenda Krynicky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rob Dixon wrote:
>> Gunnar Hjalmarsson wrote:
>> > Rob Dixon wrote:
>> >> Gunnar Hjalmarsson wrote:
>> >>> swaroop wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> As we know there are 3 ways a system shell command to be executed.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> 1.> $var = system("command");
>> >>>> 2.> $var = exec("command");
>> >>>> 3.> $var = `command`;
>> >>>>
>> >>>> What is difference between these three?
>> >>>
>> >>> You should not have asked that question here; you should have looked up
>> >>> the answer in the docs.
>> >>
>> >> I think you should talk to the other abusive people who like to post
>> >> here and
>> >> form a separate group.
>> >
>> > I take it that you don't agree.
>> >
>> > The OP wondered about two built-in functions and the backticks operator.
>> > I can't think of a more natural first step to find out how they work
>> > than reading about them in the Perl documentation. Do you mean that I'm
>> > abusive by suggesting that people make it a habit to use the docs at
>> > first hand? If that's what you mean, I think you are plain stupid.
>>
>> It has become popular in the last year or so to criticize people who ask
>> questions on this list essentially for not already knowing the answer. If you
>> have lost track of what sort of information a Perl beginner may not know then
>> you should not be trying to help them. It is entirely possible that the OP
>> had
>> no knowledge of the built in documentation, or even that he had already read
>> it,
>> failed to understand it and was looking for a summary from people who were
>> more
>> familiar with the language. The pompous RTFM reply is precisely what Casey
>> was
>> trying to put a stop to when he initiated this list.
>
> Spoonfeeding someone is not the best way to help him/her. He/she will
> only become dependent.
>
There is a world of difference between spoonfeeding and simple
civility. I think all Rob is asking for is that we observe the social
graces. Perhaps "You might want to read X, it has a lot of useful
info," instead of "I can't believe you had the gall to ask that; go
away." If you gently suggest someone read the docs a few times,
they'll get the hint.
> If swaroop did not know where to find the docs, he/she should have
> asked where to find the docs.
That assumes OP knew what docs might exist. part of being a newbie is
learning your way around perldoc. It's not exactly an intuitive
system. Or to put it another way: people who kown how to use the docs
effectively don't ask many questions here.
Just approach this critically: this list takes time. No one who knew
where to look in the docs would waste time coming to this list. It
just doesn't make sense.
>
> If he/she could not understand the difference from the docs, he/she
> should have said he can't understand the docs and if possible say
> what does he find hard to understand.
>
In theory, this is nice. But in practice, if you know enough to know
what you don't understand, you can figure out the answer. One comes to
this list when one doesn't know where to look. Even though the
solution is obvious to the person who answers, it is, by definition,
not obvious to the person who asked. Hence the question. Making people
feel like idiots for asking questions isn't any more helpful than
"spoonfeeding."
> There's nothing pompous about pointing someone at the source of the
> information he needs. It could, and probably should, be done better,
There are more and less tactful ways to say anything. I think we
should all aim for rather more than less.
Cheers,
-- j
--------------------------------------------------
This email and attachment(s): [ ] blogable; [ x ] ask first; [ ]
private and confidential
daggerquill [at] gmail [dot] com
http://www.tuaw.com http://www.downloadsquad.com http://www.engatiki.org
values of β will give rise to dom!
