String buffer instead of file handle?

[danparker276]

I love chicks that can't read.

How about if some total stranger shouted out "whats on TV tonight"
whilst holding a TV guide in their hands?

 

[RedGrittyBrick]

.NET 2.0 blows

I was wondering why you were struggling with perl when you could be
dashing off a quick .NET 2.0 replacement.

Aren't any of your 9000 MySpace friends any good at .NET 2.0 either?
Maybe they can help?

 

[danparker276]

I wish I could do it in .net. We gotta use linux servers for much of
the stuff where I work. Problem is I finish the .net stuff so quickly
that I have to work on this other perl and java crap. I used to
program in Java a lot, but .NET just blows it away now.

My MySpace friends rule, see I'm really popular because I breakdance on
stage at clubs, and chicks see how good looking I am and want to talk
to me. I'm kissing my biceps as i'm typing this message now. You can
see me at www.bboy360.com, I back up what I say.

 

[RedGrittyBrick]

I have to work on this other perl and java crap.

You *have* to? You're not some kind of a wimp just pretending to be a
stud are you?

but .NET just blows

You said that already.

My MySpace friends rule,

They suck at .NET 2.0 though don't they.

 

[RedGrittyBrick]

I love chicks that can't read.

This is where your analogy breaks down. I suspect you can read, at least
a little bit. If you're a chick then your name suggests you're not the
sort of chick anyone would invite in to watch Prison Break.

Q.E.D.

 

[Steve K.]

Mumia W. wrote:
| On 09/13/2006 05:31 PM, (e-mail address removed) wrote:
| > Tad,
| > " open($fh, '>', \$variable)" This would work perfect, just not the
| > right version of perl. [...]
|
| Do you mean that you can't install and use IO::Scalar?

That assumes he knows of it. Why can't anyone realize not everyone
memorizes all of CPAN by heart. Yes you can search it, but sometimes
it's not a straight forward task as it may seem, especially if you don't
know what to look for (yet) in the first place, and hence a perfectly
acceptable reason for posting such a post that the OP posted...

| If you haven't tried it, you probably can.


Heres a link.

http://search.cpan.org/search?query=IO::Scalar&mode=all

You can also attempt to install it using the CPAN shell from the
commandline:

$ perl -MCPAN -e shell
install IO::Scalar

 

[David Squire]

Mumia W. wrote:
| On 09/13/2006 05:31 PM, (e-mail address removed) wrote:
| > Tad,
| > " open($fh, '>', \$variable)" This would work perfect, just not the
| > right version of perl. [...]
|
| Do you mean that you can't install and use IO::Scalar?

That assumes he knows of it. Why can't anyone realize not everyone
memorizes all of CPAN by heart.

It had already been pointed out to him in this thread. Why can't some
folk check a thread before jumping in?


DS

 

[Paul Lalli]

The biggest problem with this group and others that display the same
attitudes, is that many who frequent this group seem to presume that
most, shall we say, inexperienced users are automatically clueless.

On the contrary. If we were to assume "newbies" are clueless, we would
assume they're incapable of doing any research on their own, and would
feel it necessary to hand-feed answers. By pointing people to
documentation, we are giving them the benefit of the doubt that they
are capable of learning on their own, if only they know about the
proper resources.

Paul Lalli

 

[Ted Zlatanov]

Serious? Was that supposed to be funny? I scored with 2 chicks last
weekend! Think about that next time your home alone on friday night.

I made a joke because the stupidity of your original statement set it
up nicely. I see it wasn't necessary, you're funnier on your own.

Ted

 

[Steve K.]

On 09/13/2006 05:31 PM, (e-mail address removed) wrote:
Tad,
" open($fh, '>', \$variable)" This would work perfect, just not
the right version of perl. [...]

Do you mean that you can't install and use IO::Scalar?

That assumes he knows of it. Why can't anyone realize not everyone
memorizes all of CPAN by heart.

It had already been pointed out to him in this thread. Why can't some
folk check a thread before jumping in?

Sorry, it was a lengthy thread, though I could of checked on google,
though I was just casually reading some posts before calling it a day
and just happened to reply.

For what it's worth, the tone the thread seemed to be moving towards did
not seem like it would yield much helpful. Lets just say I've seen this
how many of these types of thread end up going.

 

[David H. Adler]

For what it's worth, the tone the thread seemed to be moving towards did
not seem like it would yield much helpful. Lets just say I've seen this
how many of these types of thread end up going.

For what it's worth, threads often develop that tone due to people
rejecting the helpful. :-/

dha

 

[danparker276]

actually, I just like to cause trouble. It's pretty funny sometimes.
A read the docs post is useless post though, why even post that at all.

 

[Uri Guttman]

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.

uri

 

[danparker276]

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.

See there you go again. IT IS NOT IN MY DOCS, because I have an older
version of perl. My solution is to change my module to use a string
instead of a file handle. It's easier to change the module than go
through all that other hassle.
You people here are so uptight.

 

[Uri Guttman]

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.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.

dc> You people here are so uptight.

and you are too cool for us. so please shine your light elsewhere. your
eminence is slumming here. we are not worthy.

uri

 

[Steve K.]

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. >>
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. >>
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.