String buffer instead of file handle?
in [Perl]
|
Prev: Boolean Regexp with perlre
Next: Taint and memory usage
From: Steve K. on 19 Sep 2006 13:11 Uri Guttman wrote: >>>>>> "dc" == danparker276(a)yahoo com <danparker276(a)yahoo.com> writes: > > dc> Uri Guttman wrote: > >> >>>>> "dc" == danparker276(a)yahoo com <danparker276(a)yahoo.com> > writes: >> > dc> actually, I just like to cause trouble. It's pretty funny > sometimes. dc> A read the docs post is useless post though, why even > post that at all. >> > >> cause smart people (unlike you) actually will go read the > referenced >> doc. it is useful but you wouldn't know that. now > please go learn python >> and try to be funny there. they appreciate > people like you. >> > >> and stop top posting. but better yet, stop posting here. we are > tired of >> you and you were never entertaining. > >> > dc> See there you go again. IT IS NOT IN MY DOCS, because I have an > older dc> version of perl. My solution is to change my module to > use a string dc> instead of a file handle. It's easier to change > the module than go dc> through all that other hassle. > > then you can still figure that out from the newer docs on the web. but > the idea of pointing to the docs is still valid. True, one could use the online docs, but that doesn't fully apply to cases like this, as he is using an older version (maybe he has no choice, as is possible if this is in a work place) so the online docs, which are for the newest version (though I do believe there are older versions of docs online as well.) Also, one has to know they exist there too. So far, I've seen many regulars tell him to use newer docs, and the OP repeatedly stated that he's using an older version and what was recommended wasn't in his docs, so I think one could argue this is a failure of of the regulars to full read what was being written. Granted, the OP hasn't behaved exactly angelic either, but I do think we can agree he at least started out civil enough. I do NOT, however, condone his conduct in his replies, though he is clearly of a younger crowd who made his way into computers. Not everyone has grown up with computers and learned all the ways of doing things as many here have. And many forget this far too easily. I think the overall problem that's been plaguing this newsgroup is the constant rush to judgment about what someone is trying to say (and perhaps not fully reading and/or comprehending what is being said, and acting on that. Perhaps this is an inherent flaw in many newsgroups. |