On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 01:58:19PM -0000, Matthew Jones wrote:
> > As a Perl novice I'd have to say the old version looks much better. 
> > Just replacing Programming Perl would have been enough.
> 
> As another person at an early stage in my Perl self-development, I'll second
> this, and add that I'd like to add the Owl book on regexps, although I
> suppose that's not strictly perl-specific enough to go on the perl cd
> bookshelf?

It is *incredibly* useful, and I found it very easy to read, although
plenty of people criticise it for being very academic.  Good idea that
man!

I wouldn't want to put the Wolf book in there, cos IMO it's crap.  I'd
like to see 'classic' papers from TPCs in there.

-- 
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/

    This is a signature.  There are many like it but this one is mine.

** I read encrypted mail first, so encrypt if your message is important **

PGP signature

Reply via email to