Re^7: Perl::Improved Volume 0, Number 1

[Wassercrats]

This node falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.

[exussum0]

I'd appreciate a single, clear example of one or more cases to support your statement "You refuse to accept the fact that you don't know something and that you should learn." Many people appear to be that way at one time or another, but I don't believe I ever have.

I just gave you the book to look up. I own a copy. It EXPLAINS why you are wrong. You expect to be spoon fed, and that's not going to happen further than i already have. You can google everything that everyone has said and it would never be enough. I used to think you were a smart person, but you are just an idiot with narcissistic issues.

Corion gave an example of the ambiguity you're talking about. I didn't answer simply by saying "your wrong" or by referring to past mistakes or by suggesting reading material. That's what YOU just did to me. I suggested using parenthesis to group the parts of the code that should be processed first. If I'm wrong about that working, I should be corrected with something of substance. So far I haven't been.

People have given you examples and I gave you a reference to computer scientists athat are more established than you may ever be. Quite frankly, you'll just ignore them too.

whatever a single vertical bar is. I meant to suggest that you could place the parenthesis around the two vertical bars that you want to act as abs and it will work as intended.

Changing your pov mid stride? Nice.

If there are cases in which this doesn't work--maybe even the case I'm using as an example--just point it out and if I understand and you're right, I'll agree (or sometimes say nothing). If I misunderstand, maybe I'll argue, but I can't help misunderstanding sometimes. If you're wrong, I'll likely point that out to you.

Yes, 'cause you are infallible, since we've never seen you do that.

Yesterday, ikegami posted a grammar on his scratchpad that supposedly solved this problem without the need for parentheses. It's no longer there, but even Corion alluded to the fact that a grammar to enable proper parsing of my |...| idea could work. As I already said, "I don't know if anything should be changed now, but the proper notation should have been used from the start."

Well, no one has mentioned anyhwere in this thread where it won't work... riiight.. I got a bridge to sell you too.

It's obvious to me that Perl Monks in general not only is unfair with the voting system (mainly the fault of the monks doing the voting--partially the fault of the powers-that-be for not fixing the problem), but humorless.

Votes != money. If you are here for the voting system, you are here for the wrong reason. Also, there is no humour in propogating wrong information.

Your posts are usually incorrect. You mix it in with humour . Hopefully people will read this post and see, in a neat package, why you should be generally avoided.

[ysth]

It's obvious to me that Perl Monks in general not only is unfair with the voting system (mainly the fault of the monks doing the voting--partially the fault of the powers-that-be for not fixing the problem), but humorless.

I'm not humorless, but I'm not going to prove it by claiming to find you funny. (For the humor-impaired, that was a joke.)