From: Uri Guttman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 01:37:14 -0400
BR == Bob Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BRBut this morning, I had an idea for Pod::CLOD while showering.
BR (That's a good sign; some of my best ideas come to me in the shower.)
so you aren't
From: Greg London [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 23:00:24 -0400 (EDT)
Bob Rogers said:
Seriously, splitting up the options this way does make it easier to
combine them, but it still requires globals to store the values, and as
long as that's true, I find it hard
BR == Bob Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BRThe Parse sub is a prime example of what I would consider
BR counterproductive code decoration. It violates the first rule of
BR commenting, namely that comments should say something about the code
BR that is not obvious:
as i said, i am
On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 11:41:55PM -0400, Bob Rogers wrote:
Uri Guttman [EMAIL PROTECTED] supershited:
use strict;
use warnings should be here too.
Thank you; that sounds like a good idea. (Though usually my main
interest in manipulating perl warnings is shutting them up in production
Bob Rogers wrote:
I think I'm already well past that point in terms of option-parsing
complexity. I have places where the command_line_options method calls
SUPER::command_line_options in order to replace/rename options, so I
need some way to supercede and/or rename things.
got it. I had to
Greg London wrote:
Bob Rogers wrote:
I have places where the command_line_options method calls
SUPER::command_line_options in order to replace/rename options, so I
need some way to supercede and/or rename things.
Hey, just a random thought, but rather than building up a simple
string in
From: David Cantrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 11:11:29 +0100
On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 11:41:55PM -0400, Bob Rogers wrote:
Uri Guttman [EMAIL PROTECTED] supershited:
use strict;
use warnings should be here too.
Thank you; that sounds like a good idea.
From: Greg London [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2004 09:43:38 -0400
. . .
A quick email to Damian with your rule search/replace/rename
question might get you a quick answer. who knows, Damian
might be able to tweak it while he's on a long flight somewhere.
If you
BR == Bob Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BR problem. In particular, I have had to use
BR no warnings 'recursion';
BR on occasion because the implementers of perl thought it sufficiently
BR abnormal to be worth a warning if a particular function is ever entered
BR 100 times more
On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 00:17, Uri Guttman wrote:
use warnings should be here too.
[...]
i like _$method better.
[...]
i don't like using = like that.
Uri, you're ripping the guy's code to shreds over minor points of
syntactic sugar... I seem to remember that Perl's moto isn't There's
only one
On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 10:34, Aaron Sherman wrote:
On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 00:17, Uri Guttman wrote:
use warnings should be here too.
[...]
i like _$method better.
[...]
i don't like using = like that.
Uri, you're ripping the guy's code to shreds over minor points of
syntactic sugar...
Bob Rogers said:
easier to add command-line options through class inheritance and reuse
than it is to document them. I have attached an early version of the
Hm, I've been using Getopt::Declare for a lot of
command-line scripts at work. I'm not a webhead,
I do command line tools, so command
SQ == Sean Quinlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
SQ On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 10:34, Aaron Sherman wrote:
On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 00:17, Uri Guttman wrote:
use warnings should be here too.
[...]
i like _$method better.
[...]
i don't like using = like that.
Uri, you're
On Wed, 8 Sep 2004, Uri Guttman wrote:
SQ == Sean Quinlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
SQ While making recommendations on style can be useful, particularly
SQ in the cases where it can reduce the possibility of bugs, I would
SQ agree that approaching the main request of the poster first might
SQ
From: Sean Quinlan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2004 11:25:07 -0400
Although I haven't personally come across the need to have multiple
scripts have re-used command line options yet (other than a few old
historic cases), this sounds like an interesting project for handling
From: Uri Guttman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2004 00:17:15 -0400
BR == Bob Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BR use strict;
use warnings should be here too.
Thank you; that sounds like a good idea. (Though usually my main
interest in manipulating perl warnings is
BR == Bob Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BR sub BEGIN {
BR no strict 'refs';
BR for my $method (qw(option_definers additional_options
BR man_p help_p usage_p)) {
BR my $field = '_' . $method;
BRi like _$method better.
BR I don't; it's harder to see.
i find . hard to see
17 matches
Mail list logo
