At 2002-04-16 20:16:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And no, saying perl5 will still be around isn't doing us much good.
There won't be new development of perl5, or bug fixes.
There will. It'll just be slower than it is now.
- ams
And no, saying perl5 will still be around isn't doing us much good.
There won't be new development of perl5, or bug fixes.
Other languages will remain being developed and bugfixed. If perl6 is
going to happen (I hope it won't), I'll be shopping for a new language.
perl6 will just be
On 4/17/02 9:11 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] claimed:
I find it amazing that someone can make a statement like 99% of the
time, people leave whitespace of the aggregate and the index, just
based on personal experience.
Based on the code *I* have written in the past 20 years,
On 4/16/02 5:06 PM, Ton Hospel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's very well possible that I'll stubbornly keep using perl5 if perl6
comes out.
Maybe my (mis)understanding from Larry is that Perl 6 will provide a jumping
off platform into better language non-specific things that we may not see at
I have the habit of doing:
last if (substr($vFlag, 1, 3) eq 'END');
$vSub = \Sneex if (substr($vFlag, 1, 5) eq 'SNEEX');
$vSub = \Admin if (substr($vFlag, 1, 5) eq 'ADMIN');
$vSub = \Reports if (substr($vFlag, 1, 7) eq 'REPORTS');
$vSub = \Logsif (substr($vFlag, 1, 4) eq
It's very well possible that I'll stubbornly keep using perl5 if perl6
comes out.
Maybe my (mis)understanding from Larry is that Perl 6 will provide a jumping
off platform into better language non-specific things that we may not see at
this time, but things that will become apparent
-- Bill -Sx- Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have the habit of doing:
last if (substr($vFlag, 1, 3) eq 'END');
$vSub = \Sneex if (substr($vFlag, 1, 5) eq 'SNEEX');
$vSub = \Admin if (substr($vFlag, 1, 5) eq 'ADMIN');
$vSub = \Reports if (substr($vFlag, 1, 7) eq 'REPORTS');
$vSub
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 02:02:02PM -0400, Bill -Sx- Jones wrote:
I have the habit of doing:
last if (substr($vFlag, 1, 3) eq 'END');
$vSub = \Sneex if (substr($vFlag, 1, 5) eq 'SNEEX');
$vSub = \Admin if (substr($vFlag, 1, 5) eq 'ADMIN');
$vSub = \Reports if (substr($vFlag, 1,
suicide is an honorable option.
croak $$: The uers are idiots!
unless $api eq makes sense;
Adding in some sort of delimiter:
SNEEX|ADMIN|END
my %jumpz =
(
SNEEX = \foo,
ADMIN = \bar,
...
);
my $regex = join '|', keys %jumpz;
if( my ($name) = $vflag =~
On 4/17/02 2:22 PM, Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The above implies the format is something like:
SNEEXADMINEND
in which case, suicide is an honorable option.
:)
Actually, the input data looks more like
[SNEEX]
[ADMIN]
[END]
Sorry for the mass hysteria;
Actually, the input data looks more like
[SNEEX]
[ADMIN]
[END]
my $regex = '\b(' . join('|', keys %jumpz) . ')\b';
if( my ($name) = $foo =~ /$regex/o )
{
my $sub = $jumpz{$name};
...
}
Sorry for the mass hysteria;
What hysteria? Hysteria? Oh, no...
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 02:34:20PM -0400, Bill -Sx- Jones wrote:
On 4/17/02 2:22 PM, Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The above implies the format is something like:
SNEEXADMINEND
in which case, suicide is an honorable option.
:)
Actually, the input data looks
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002 15:01:50 -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 02:34:20PM -0400, Bill -Sx- Jones wrote:
Actually, the input data looks more like
[SNEEX]
[ADMIN]
[END]
# setup %Dispatch as before, then...
while( $vData =~ /\[([A-Z])\]/g ) {
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 10:23:42AM -0700, David Wheeler wrote:
On 4/17/02 9:11 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] claimed:
I find it amazing that someone can make a statement like 99% of the
time, people leave whitespace of the aggregate and the index, just
based on personal
On 4/17/02 12:53 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] claimed:
I think the gain is just the option of not having to write () in if.
If () was still mandatory, there would be no ambiguity when a block
is a hash index and when it cannot be - which means it has to be a
closure.
Well, that
-- Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 12:28:37PM -0700, Rick Klement wrote:
There's already a %dispatch set up for you by perl...
I'd have used it but it just fell into the gaping security hole.
A recent Phrack article pointed out that one of the SOAP/RPC/XML
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 04:38:50PM -0500, Steven Lembark wrote:
A recent Phrack article pointed out that one of the SOAP/RPC/XML
modules was doing this:
$soap-$tainted_method_name(@args);
Use -T and untaint by extracting the subname:
my $flag = ::$input =~ /\w+$/;
Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 12:28:37PM -0700, Rick Klement wrote:
There's already a %dispatch set up for you by perl...
I'd have used it but it just fell into the gaping security hole.
A recent Phrack article pointed out that one of the SOAP/RPC/XML
modules was
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 04:16:08PM -0700, Rick Klement wrote:
Notice that the regex match (which should have been /\[([A-Z]+)\]/ )
effectively untaints and closes the security hole by disallowing
anything through that is not [A-Z]+
This is still too lenient, you've just narrowed the possible
I like something like this, where the sub name is is sub_KEYWORD (from a
CGI, hopefully you can extract usefulness):
eval sub_.param('page') if (param defined param('page') defined
sub_.param('page'));
page_login; # If all else fails...
- adm
At 02:02 PM 4/17/2002, Bill -Sx- Jones wrote:
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 09:01:37PM -0400, Aaron D. Marasco wrote:
I like something like this, where the sub name is is sub_KEYWORD (from a
CGI, hopefully you can extract usefulness):
eval sub_.param('page') if (param defined param('page') defined
sub_.param('page'));
The last clause
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 07:59:22PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Just because the safety is on doesn't mean you should juggle handguns.
Never know whose foot it'll blow off.
Awww. You're no fun.
--
Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pjcj.net
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 10:23:42AM -0700, David Wheeler wrote:
On 4/17/02 9:11 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] claimed:
I find it amazing that someone can make a statement like 99% of
the time, people leave whitespace of the aggregate and the
index,
David Wheeler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
Braces with whitespace in front of them are now always closures. This adds
a
great deal of power and flexibility to the design. But if some people just
are lamenting the loss of the whitespace in hash accesses because that's
the
standard that C
24 matches
Mail list logo
