To whom it may concern,
Some people seem to forget the perl motto, "There is more than one way to do
it."
Rather than simply posting a solution and explaining the method as a reply
to zim, who asked the question, Dondi chose to improve my method. I replied
and said Dondi was right. I wonder what part of "you're right" Dondi does
not understand? That's is a rhetorical question; no reply is necessary.
Dondi persists in wasting his time and mine revising a method again and
again. Dondi has never posted a direct reply to zim explaining a method.
That, after all, is the purpose of the thread... to answer zim's question.
I answered zim's question. I offered a method that works; I included an
explanation that is consistent with *my* solution. I assume zim found an
answer and has left; maybe zim will ask a question if more information is
needed.
As to Dondi's optimal improvements, I offer this section of the perl
documentation from perldoc perlstyle.
o Think about reusability. Why waste brainpower on a one-shot when
you might want to do something like it again? Consider
generalizing your code. Consider writing a module or object class.
Consider making your code run cleanly with "use strict" and "use
warnings" (or -w) in effect. Consider giving away your code.
Consider changing your whole world view. Consider... oh, never
mind.
o Be consistent.
o Be nice.
There are no relevant technical issues to this newsgroup that remain to be
discussed. I have offered to discuss anything further by e-mail.
"Consider... oh, never mind. Be consistent. Be nice."