Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-07-13
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: par2
Version : 0.2
Upstream Author : Peter Brian Clements <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://parchive.sorceforge.net/
* License : (GPL)
Description : Parity Archive
Package: gcc-2.95
Depends: gcc (>= 1:2.95.3-2)
Package: gcc
Version: 3:3.3-2
^^^
I was having a hell of a time recently trying to compile 2.4.20 (machine's
been flaking since an upgrade to 2.4.21) which fails under GCC3.3. So I tried
compiling under 2.95 which was... 3.3. Final
On Mon, 4 Aug 2003 23:37:32 -0400
Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What you meant to do was to run "make CC=gcc-2.95" instead of make. There
> is no need to futz around with the default gcc version; just ask for what
> you want.
Uh, no. I am aware of that. That, however, did not
On Mon, 4 Aug 2003 21:14:08 -0700
Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Uh, no. I am aware of that. That, however, did not prevent it from
> running the wrong GCC. v2.4.21 of the kernel had a problem with 3.3.
Correction, 2.4.20. For some reason 2.4.21 seems to be crashi
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 00:25:27 -0400
Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I fail to see how 2.95 installing both 3.3 and 2.95 somehow equates to
> a problem!
A failed kernel compile when trying to bring stability to a machine
constitutes as a problem in my book.
> I build kernels wit
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 08:56:50 -0400
Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, I know that's 2.4.21, but I'm not going to unpack a whole 2.4.20 tree
> to demonstrate that it works the same way. It does.
I never said it didn't work. What I said was that when I did it 2.4.20
had the same e
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 09:25:38 -0400
Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Then perhaps this particular problem was not with gcc 3.3. I think some
> additional investigation would be prudent before any talk about grave bugs.
Which is why I asked here first before just filing.
--
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 09:33:53 -0400
> Please stop crusading, and find out what your kernel build actually
> did. Because it works just fine for all the rest of us.
Who's crusading? I am pointing out what I see as an apparent problem for
discussion. Crusading would be to file the damned bug wi
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 10:54:38 -0400
Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Don't compile your kernel with gcc 3.3. I don't know whether the bugs lie
> in the kernel or in gcc (or both), but this combination does not work
> correctly.
Yeah. That was the whole reason I was trying to get a co
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 08:14:23 -0700 (PDT)
Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Note that, if for some reason the user knew about the command
> "apropos", even that wouldn't help him -- none of dselect, aptitude,
> and apt-get come up for "apropos install" or "apropos setup".
I do believe the
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 11:06:26 -0400
"H. S. Teoh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Did you check your compile logs to see if it actually compiled with
> gcc-2.95 or with just gcc (==3.3) ? It happened to me several times that
> when building 2.4.21, it would use gcc-2.95 for the initial configuration
> an
Adam, where does it say anywhere in my sig or headers that I want a CC? I
read the list just fine, you can reply to the list and only the list just
fine. I don't appreciate replying to what I think is a private message only
to see a copy of it in the public area and have to resend the message
Oh, look, someone else who CCs when it is obvious the person they're
responding to is participating right here.
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 09:55:59 -0700 (PDT)
Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Steve Lamb wrote:
> What manual?
I rest my case.
> I r
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 21:38:19 +0200
Emile van Bergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Apple has a great way of doing that. They don't dumb down, they don't
> belittle you, they assume an intelligent being who can grasp reasonably
> complex English sentences, but who has less knowledge of computer
> idiom
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 22:16:37 +0200
Emile van Bergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would even scream at
>
> /Variable Data/
>
> simply because it encourages slow and RSI-inducing click and drag
> behaviour, because such path names are impossible to type in (and this
> one even requires escaping t
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 21:42:43 +0200
"Artur R. Czechowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like to know Md's opinion, but for me there are no reasons to relax
> dependencies for mutt (and other MUA). I would not like to do it without
> policy requirements because it concerns also other MUA's.
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 12:16:43 -0400
"H. S. Teoh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Downgrading sounds like overkill in this situation. I only had to edit
> /usr/src/linux/Makefile to change HOSTCC to gcc-2.95 and export
> CC=gcc-2.95 in the environment, and it worked fine for me. This is on
> 2.4.21, of c
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 23:30:11 +0100
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hixie's pretty well-known in certain other free software circles. What
> I've seen of him elsewhere implies to me that he isn't incompetent in
> the least, and frankly I think you're going way overboard in the
> hostility o
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 09:35:29 +0200
Matthias Urlichs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IMHO using any local mailer is a bad idea on a desktop system. You send
> off the mail, your MUA says "Sent", you power down or just close the
> laptop, and, if your smarthost happens to be a bit slow today, the mail
>
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 13:34:49 +0200
Michael Piefel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am 6.08.03 um 13:04:41 schrieb Emile van Bergen:
> > Neither tab-completion or globbing is available when I'm editing a file
> > and have to write those path names.
> In Vim insert mode, press ^X^F for completion, ^N/^
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 13:10:03 +0200
"Bernhard R. Link" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If mutt spoke SMTP, it would be a MTA itself. (Perhaps still missing
> the proper interface to link /usr/lib/sendmail to mutt, but that would
> be the lesser part).
No, it would not. It would be using another me
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 10:07:40 -0400
Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not if the projects have different goals.
If the goal is the same only the process to that goal is broken then it is
a waste of time and effort.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink,
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 10:30:11 -0400
Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't see your name on http://nm.debian.org/nmlist.php. What part of the
> process are you claiming is broken?
I wasn't aware my name had to be on the list to recognize that some have
been there for years.
--
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 09:27:10 -0500
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And is a much better choice than expecting every user to locally
> configure smtp settings in the MUA. Lack of direct-SMTP support in mutt
> is a good thing.
Yeah because entering "smtp.isp.com" is just so trying fo
I do not need CCs. I am obviously active on the list.
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 23:28:52 +0800
Cameron Patrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 08:04:00AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> It is if they have to dig up what the correct SMTP server is. Or if
> they'
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 11:26:12 -0500
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (IMO, the kernel ignoring $(CC) is the kernel's problem.)
One problem doesn't excuse the other.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 10:48:29 -0600
Hans Fugal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> New mutt users might be slightly confused by the mutt way of doing
> things but that doesn't mean we have to patch mutt for their sakes.
> Naturally, it's up to the package maintainer how to differ from
> upstream, but this
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 18:50:21 +0200
Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Steve Lamb
> | How many local users are you going to have on a laptop whose correct
> SMTP| server changes as a function of their location?
> Usually: one, I guess.
So 1 person, 1
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 12:56:20 -0400
Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 08:01:55AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> > On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 10:30:11 -0400
> > Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I don't see your name on ht
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 12:36:45 -0500 (CDT)
Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Aug 2003, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > (IMO, the kernel ignoring $(CC) is the kernel's problem.)
> Don't you know your O doesn't matter, only Steve's?
This isn't a matter of opinion. Simple test. When
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 13:09:15 -0500 (CDT)
Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Aug 2003, Steve Lamb wrote:
> > Actually, I think it does. They should either be accepted or rejected
> > within x days. x being somewhere below rand(20) * 365. Either they are
>
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 13:11:47 -0500 (CDT)
Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > No, I never said their status was unjust. I said the process appears
> > broken. Two completely different statements. I cannot think of any
> > conceivable justification for ANY application to be present for ye
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 12:13:41 -0600
Hans Fugal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It would alter the way my mail is sent.
Are you sure? I see nothing in the patch that would require the use of
SMTP. The verbage always says "allow". I do not see the code for using the
local MTA removed at all.
--
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 14:00:38 -0500
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry, that's the admin's job to configure. If the user and the
> admin are one and the same, why does it matter if the configuration is
> done in a local or a global config file? (sudo dpkg-reconfigure ...)
> And if th
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 19:50:36 +0100
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> About the same as finding a sponsor, then, with about the same ease of
> maintenance afterwards (i.e. you still have to run your changes past
> someone, not upload them directly).
Except when your sponsor goes AWOL for
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 19:29:30 +0100
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thus, while the situation isn't optimal, I can't see a better way.
Thank you. In the past 3 days you're the first person to actually explain
why things are contrary to how every other package is instead of trying to
b
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 21:34:26 +0200
Matthias Urlichs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So how can we get it into your head that the other is _not_ a problem?
By explaining why gcc 3.3 is needed for gcc 2.95 to work in the first
place! Is that too much to ask? Apparently! Lemme put it this way: In
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 16:22:51 -0400
Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, it is too much to ask, because it is impossible to explain the reason
> for something which isn't so. gcc 2.95 doesn't require gcc 3.3, it just
> requires some version of the 'gcc' package with a version number >=
>
On 06 Aug 2003 16:27:24 -0500
Joe Wreschnig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's a problem, but it's a problem every large project and many small
> ones have, not just Debian. Claiming that Debian is dying because of it
> is absurd.
I never claimed Debian is dying and if I were it would be for a
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 17:06:53 -0400
Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You haven't listened.
You've not said anything worth listening to.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 16:26:06 -0500 (CDT)
Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Have you ever heard of alternatives? If 2 packages are installed, both
> providing the same alternative, it's up to you to decide which is used.
Yes, I have. I've used it quite a bit.
> I'm not saying that /usr/
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 17:45:44 -0400
Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 02:39:42PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> > On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 17:06:53 -0400
> > Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > You haven't listened.
> &g
On 06 Aug 2003 16:48:18 -0500
Joe Wreschnig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Let them go. IMO it's far better to install more than is necessary, but
> always get the desired functionality, than install less than is desired,
> and then have to spend 20 hours recompiling for the necessary
> functionality
On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 07:27:01 +0200
Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't know the laws where you come from, but in .no, I think this
> would be very illegal. Also, you don't want to archive everything
> that passes through a mail server, that'll just give you a huge bunch
> of unorg
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 17:23:17 +0100
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:27:00AM +0300, Richard Braakman wrote:
> > Because you think it's an awesome group with laudable goals and you
> > want to contribute?
> TBH, that's a lousy reason to join Debian. Send a chequ
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 20:23:48 +0100
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:06:39PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 17:23:17 +0100
> > Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:2
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 21:23:20 +0100
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Of course that isn't true, I was just showing the farce of your
> > statement. Obviously you want people who like the project to contribute.
> You have failed miserably at understanding my statement. I do not want
>
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 13:29:03 -0700
Craig Dickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew said that merely liking Debian wasn't a good enough reason to
> want to join the project.
No, he said it wasn't a good reason. No "enough".
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"TBH, that's a lousy reason to join
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 15:49:28 -0500
Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 05:10:01PM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> > I've always thought KDE a wonderful example of what happens when you
> > give commit access to just about anybody too.
> > Scott
> > (GNOME user)
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 23:25:41 +0100
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I *do not* want people to contribute *because* they "like the
> project".
What other reason would their be? Why would they want to contribute to a
project they don't like esp. when there is no financial gain for it
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 00:08:38 +0100
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anybody who has to ask "Why should I/we/they contribute?" is not
> suitable for Debian.
Oddly enough, I've never asked that.
> (The "answer", incidentally, is "because we can"
> or "because it's there", or some oth
On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 07:32:43 +0200
Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Somebody ITP-ed cpufreq a little time ago. That's quite important if
> you are using a laptop (which a lot of DDs are) with ACPI and you
> don't want to burn all your battery.
> New tools get written all the time, ma
On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 08:04:04 +0200
Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Steve Lamb
> (please trim your lines a little, 72 chars/line is considered
> standard, to allow for a few levels of quoting before breaking the
> lines on a 80 char wide terminal. TIA.)
Ple
On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 08:52:14 +0200
Matthias Urlichs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OTOH, most editors can be configured as to which characters they consider
> to be quotes.
True, but reflow across multiple levels tends to break when one has
different quote characters to contend with.
--
On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 09:06:56 +0200
Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So it can if you use | or : or some other random character as well.
> It's still a bit silly to have to reflow all your paragraphs at the
> first quotation level, but whatever.
Which I don't. Since the quoted text
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 08:29:54 +0100
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually, you have misconstrued it the other way. It really was "You
> like it therefore you should contribute".
No. There is a difference between these two statements:
I like Debian therefore I should contribute.
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 09:33:24 +0100
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bullshit. Our "community" consists of heckling each other until we get
> it right. Membership is about doing the damn work; I guess that's a
> form of "resources".
But I thought it was perfectly possible to perform wor
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 17:59:52 +0100
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 10:32:07AM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
> Start with the things about Debian which are distinctly different from
> other projects. You should be able to find some things which you want
> to do which d
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 23:39:25 +0100
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Two pounds of flax.
Oh, you play A Tale in the Desert?
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 11:44:34 +0100
Stephen Stafford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry, but I do NOT see how this is a grave bug. It's wishlist (at best).
I tend to agree with the grave aspect.
> YOU might not agree that C-R systems are good (personally I detest them),
> but that does NOT me
Just some additional data points as I have been following this and other
related C-R threads for a while now.
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 12:35:25 +0100
"Karsten M. Self" wrote:
[ Snip ]
> Specific to my own experience: over half the C-R challenges (TMDA or
> otherwise) I've received have been for m
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 16:31:59 +
benfoley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 29 August 2003 09:28, Steve Lamb wrote:
> > Oddly enough Spamassassin doesn't exasperate the problem. TDMA does.
> exacerbate is probably what you meant here.
Quite so. 1
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 00:36:57 -0700
Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, since we're pointing fingers, it's really SMTP that's broken by
> design, and all anti-spam programs (including C-R systems) are merely
> stopgap measures that try to make up for SMTP's shortcomings.
Oddly eno
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 23:49:40 +
Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. The modular design of SMTP agents like postfix do not allow
> scanning of messages before the message has been accepted by the
> MTA at the SMTP session. I think you would have to add hooks
> into smtpd, but that is going
On Mon, 8 Sep 2003 15:40:15 +1000
Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 06:04:39AM +0100, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > I'm coming to the view that we're approaching the era where all mail is
> > going to have to be subject to filtering, at the MTA level.
> Depends on h
On Tue, 9 Sep 2003 07:49:36 +0100
> It's the same sort of thinking that's causing no end of trouble for people
> trying to communicate with AOL users:
> http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=96264
> http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/03/04/13/2215207.shtml?tid=120
I've g
On Tue, 9 Sep 2003 12:50:51 +0200
"Julian Mehnle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, you can't make such a general statement that using content-based filters
> is "better" than using DNS RBLs. It wholly depends on the listing policy of
> the RBL, and in most cases, content-based filters will be the
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 19:34:58 -0400
"H. S. Teoh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've resorted to blocking port 25 to subnets from which these spams
What would help is to be able to block an IP once it's been hit. Thing is
I cannot for the life of me figure out a way to do it. Here's the first 2
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 18:48:58 -0500
Gunnar Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0821.txt
And what does RFC2821 have to say about it?
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to t
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 22:44:50 -0400
"H. S. Teoh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Another major source is rr.com, which not only gives me tons of Swen, but
> also other spam in general. I've blacklisted rr.com in /etc/hosts.deny,
> but obviously I'm missing something obvious, 'cos rr.com spam still gets
You are aware Mutt is perfectly capable of responding to the list. Learn
it, love it, USE IT!
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 10:20:46 -0500
Gunnar Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Steve Lamb dijo [Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 07:21:05PM -0700]:
> > Gunnar Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 08:39:02 -0400
"H. S. Teoh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 08:46:15PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> > Except it never hits SA nor do I even have procmail installed. Can't
> > stand the ugly beast.
> It never hi
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 16:45:55 +0200
Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For now I'm using the SA-Exim method because even though it's clumsy (needs
> the .so file compiled from source so distribution isn't as trivial as an
> apt-get invocation), I used it before the Exiscan patch was available
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 21:07:46 +0200
Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 10:43:30AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> > Same here though I am sticking with SA-Exim because it saves the mail
> > in a certain range so I can throw it at the Bayesian clas
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:17:45 +0200
Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Runs spamc twice. Usually it won't matter, but with higher traffic, the load
> will increase for obvious reasons...
spamc isn't run twice. exiscan-acl *can* run the mail through SA as a
test. It doesn't /have/ to. S
H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 02:29:52PM -0600, Chad Walstrom wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 02:19:02PM -0500, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Also, as an off-topic note, blank lines that contain tabs or spaces
are Pure Evil(tm), especially in code. One of these days I should
write a sed script to
H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 11:47:34AM -0600, Chad Walstrom wrote:
[snip]
I have a love-hate relationship with the significant whitespace.
I have a hate-hate relationship with it. I much prefer free-style syntax
where the programmer is allowed to use his best judgment on how to inde
Gunnar Wolf wrote:
I strongly reccomend Perl. Why? Well, that's how I learnt (or more
properly, how I picked up after years of inactivity) programming (I
had only BASIC experience before that). Perl is a language meant to be
easy to write - Yes, your first code will probably not be very
maintainabl
David Palmer wrote:
(2) Perl or Python. This seems to be another divided camp.
What are the capabilities of each? What are the applications of each?
Python and Perl have basically the same capabilities and applications as
the other. The major difference is Python doesn't look like warm-over
One of these days I'll also learn how to proofread before I hit send...
Steve Lamb wrote:
decade of Wordstar-esque editors ending with joe. I have vi. I love
Hate, not have.
mode when you want to be in command mode. When in edit mode ESC costs
you nothing. It doesn't ch
Tom wrote:
Significant whitespace? Shudder, that brings back crusty old memories
of Fortran. I have great fondness for fortran because of the wonderful
mathematical algorithms in LinPack, but I have no fondness for
significant whitespace.
And? Does Fortran's rules map to Pythons? I often
H. S. Teoh wrote:
That doesn't negate the fact that I find significant whitespace rather
atrocious. I really rather use a language where I'm free to format the
code the way I want it, to maximally convey its meaning, rather than to be
forced to write it a certain way because some genius decided tha
Tom wrote:
Do whitespace mistakes cause compile time errors? The frustrating thing
about fortran was variable names that started with C could be
interpreted as comments not indented correctly, which would just cause
that line to be skipped. Integer literals not indented correctly could
be int
Julian Mehnle wrote:
I call that readable, but I guess somebody won't. ;-)
Actually it is quite readable and sensible in that it breaks down the
regex into parts that a human can read. Oh, and the equivolant would be legal
in Python. Which was kind of my point on asking H.S. the two questio
Isaac To wrote:
E.g., it is more difficult to
cut some code in one function and paste it into another. So for best
results one really have to use an editor (and perhaps other tools) that
knows about such significant whitespaces.
Not really if one is wanting to maintain proper indention in both
H. S. Teoh wrote:
Yeah, 'whitespace' about sums up the value of it. Except to Python
programmers, of course. :-P :-P
Quite the contrary. First off generally flames are from the uninformed.
Since in most cases the evils of whitespace are spouted off by those who
have never once touched Pytho
Tom wrote:
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 11:04:48AM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
*It looks like multi-line method invocations require parenthesis to be
indented at the paren level. Sometimes that's useful, but often I like
to pack arguments tighter than that and indent only once on subsequent
H. S. Teoh wrote:
Not for any non-trivial task, although I did try to learn it some time
ago. Recently, I had the chance to take another look at it; however, I
found Ruby, which seemed to have the best of both Perl and Python plus
true object-orientation. So when I move on from Perl (which I love,
Cameron Patrick wrote:
I don't think it is. Python doesn't have a switch/case equivalent. It'd
have to be done with a bunch of if's or something.
Well, depends. Do you consider its dictionary to be a switch?
>>> def foo():
... print "foolio"
...
>>> def bar():
... print "bario"
...
>
Cameron Patrick wrote:
Nope, no fall-through in that one, so it doesn't help. It /is/ nifty
though :-)
Uh, there was a fall through there. Notice that if x has a value that
isn't in the dictionary the if will fall through to the else.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm
On 23 Jun 1998 17:20:09 +0200, Milan Zamazal wrote:
>`jed' is an orphaned package. I'm considering to take its maintanence,
>since I've found JED is a small and quick start editor, good for quick
>editing of configuration files, etc. (I've wiped out all vis from my
>disk, and ae+ed do not satisfy
On 03 Oct 1998 00:41:50 +0100, James Troup wrote:
>Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> On Thu, Oct 01, 1998 at 05:36:37PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
>> > Assuming, of course, that Debian will accept them as a developer.
>> Are people with legiti
On Mon, 5 Oct 1998 20:31:24 -0700, Robert Woodcock wrote:
>1. YES, PLEASE
>2. Let's wait for vmailer
>* What's the status of vmailer now?
Supposedly it is about ready to be released. Of course, I don't see what
all the hoopla over vmailer is about in the first place.
--
Steve C.
On Wed, 7 Oct 1998 13:00:51 +0200, Paul Slootman wrote:
>I personally have confidence in Exim's quality in this regard.
>Demon (a large ISP in the UK and the Netherlands, www.demon.net)
>uses Exim as its customer-facing smtp interface, so I guess that they're
>convinced as well.
Just curious
On Thu, 8 Oct 1998 20:09:51 +1300, theone wrote:
>Names after Slink is very simple. They should just be named after
>userfriendly
>characters.
>Check out http://www.userfriendly.org
Dust Bunny!!! Dust Bunny!!!
And not Crud Bunny :)
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm
On Sat, 10 Oct 1998 11:33:15 +1000 (EST), Craig Sanders wrote:
>the last sentence, from "However, as a special exception" is particularly
>relevant here.
So, if Qt were disttributed with the OS then it would fall under the
special exception? :)
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm
On Sun, 18 Oct 1998 11:20:28 +0200 (CEST), Remco van de Meent wrote:
>On Sun, 18 Oct 1998, Chris Leishman wrote:
> : On Sat, Oct 17, 1998 at 06:07:17PM -0500, Stephen Crowley wrote:
> : > Ok, i just apt-get upgraded about an hour ago, to my horror i can no
> : > longer login, nor can I su, it jus
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 25 Jan 1999 22:23:34 -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
>/home/(ftp|www) is just plain ugly. (It's a real pain when you're trying
>to share nfs home dirs between web servers, for example.) I use /var/ftp
>on my own system (well, actually /var/local/f
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 15:03:14 -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
>c) The argument "something on the kernel wants it" doesn't hold. For that
> matter, the kernel wants coda, and that's in project/experimental. What
> did you say? That coda is not es
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 16:21:56 -0500, Tim \(Pass the Prozac\) Sailer wrote:
>I have about 50 machines with all 4 DIMM slots filled with 128M sticks.
>I have *8* 128M swap partitions, and it's not enough since the (*&[EMAIL
>PROTECTED]
>users run progra
1 - 100 of 165 matches
Mail list logo
