Extract variable length numbers (tab delimitered) from a string?
in [Perl]
|
Prev: FAQ 9.11 How do I redirect to another page?
Next: FAQ 7.18 How can I access a dynamic variable while a similarly named lexical is in scope?
From: Sherm Pendley on 6 Aug 2010 04:26 "Uri Guttman" <uri(a)StemSystems.com> writes: >>>>>> "ML" == Martijn Lievaart <m(a)rtij.nl.invlalid> writes: > > ML> - Perl is so much more powerful, you have to write a lot less code > ML> to achieve the same goal. Less LOC, less bugs. > > that is also a good reason to promote perl. i mention it when i > can. fewer lines is always fewer bugs. That's certainly a good guideline, but it's another one of those things that can bite you if you apply it blindly. Taken too far, it results in code that looks like JAPHs or golf - the bug count may be low, but it's still going to be a maintenance nightmare. sherm-- -- Sherm Pendley <www.shermpendley.com> <www.camelbones.org> Cocoa Developer
From: Uri Guttman on 6 Aug 2010 04:35 >>>>> "SP" == Sherm Pendley <sherm.pendley(a)gmail.com> writes: SP> "Uri Guttman" <uri(a)StemSystems.com> writes: >>>>>>> "ML" == Martijn Lievaart <m(a)rtij.nl.invlalid> writes: >> ML> - Perl is so much more powerful, you have to write a lot less code ML> to achieve the same goal. Less LOC, less bugs. >> >> that is also a good reason to promote perl. i mention it when i >> can. fewer lines is always fewer bugs. SP> That's certainly a good guideline, but it's another one of those things SP> that can bite you if you apply it blindly. Taken too far, it results in SP> code that looks like JAPHs or golf - the bug count may be low, but it's SP> still going to be a maintenance nightmare. i did mention good design! of course any coding philosophy taken to an extreme is bad. look at all the OO forever langs like java! can't get any real work done since most of the time you are designing classes to get around the restrictions in the language! :) uri -- Uri Guttman ------ uri(a)stemsystems.com -------- http://www.sysarch.com -- ----- Perl Code Review , Architecture, Development, Training, Support ------ --------- Gourmet Hot Cocoa Mix ---- http://bestfriendscocoa.com ---------
From: Sherm Pendley on 6 Aug 2010 04:49 "Uri Guttman" <uri(a)StemSystems.com> writes: >>>>>> "SP" == Sherm Pendley <sherm.pendley(a)gmail.com> writes: > > SP> "Uri Guttman" <uri(a)StemSystems.com> writes: > >>>>>>> "ML" == Martijn Lievaart <m(a)rtij.nl.invlalid> writes: > >> > ML> - Perl is so much more powerful, you have to write a lot less code > ML> to achieve the same goal. Less LOC, less bugs. > >> > >> that is also a good reason to promote perl. i mention it when i > >> can. fewer lines is always fewer bugs. > > SP> That's certainly a good guideline, but it's another one of those things > SP> that can bite you if you apply it blindly. Taken too far, it results in > SP> code that looks like JAPHs or golf - the bug count may be low, but it's > SP> still going to be a maintenance nightmare. > > i did mention good design! of course any coding philosophy taken to an > extreme is bad. Yeah, I knew *you* didn't need the advice - I'm just careful about using the word "always" when newbies are in the room. Sometimes they take it to heart. > look at all the OO forever langs like java! Awww, do I *have* to? :-( sherm-- -- Sherm Pendley <www.shermpendley.com> <www.camelbones.org> Cocoa Developer
From: Marc Girod on 6 Aug 2010 05:25 On Aug 4, 7:45 pm, Tad McClellan <ta...(a)seesig.invalid> wrote: > That Kernighan guy has a bit of a reputation amongst programmer types. :-) With all respect due, my own hubris would play Hall against Kernighan. IMHO K's quote is a 'modern' one: top-down thinking. The debugger is a very good way to learn, and to expand one's understanding. It is a postmodern tool. Marc
From: wolf on 6 Aug 2010 08:01
Ted Zlatanov schrieb: > On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 16:13:38 -0400 Sherm Pendley <sherm.pendley(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > SP> Ted Zlatanov <tzz(a)lifelogs.com> writes: >>> So there's value in exploration and cleverness. > > SP> Certainly, exploring edge cases is part of the learning process. When > SP> it comes to production code, though, I find more value in simplicity. > > I mean in production too. Today's clever code is tomorrow's standard. > For example the Guttman Rossler transform at first was clever and > confusing (I've had to explain it to beginners more than once); > gradually it became established and today Perl 6 does it internally by > default. > > The threshold IMO is not "is it clever" but "will the maintainer 5 years > from now hunt me down and kill me if he goes crazy." I thus tend to > avoid Quantum::Superpositions, on-the-fly parser generators, and "ha ha" > comments in production code :) > > Ted .... and now I find myself learning about sorting algorythms to understand the answer <G>. love your comment, ted cheers, wolf |