Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Syntactic Confectionery Delight
 
PerlMonks  

Re^6: Hash key composition with a comma?

by Your Mother (Bishop)
on Mar 18, 2018 at 14:29 UTC ( #1211188=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^5: Hash key composition with a comma?
in thread Hash key composition with a comma?

The reason I asked is because it's sundialsvc4 posting anonymously and inexpertly again. He absolutely could not demonstrate what you suggest. That's the point of asking him. One does not get to say, this is trivial and then substitute handwaving for technical details. An anonymous-hat-monk called me out once when I said something was semi-trivial so I backed it up because I know what I'm doing and while I'm just as in love with the sound of my keyboard as the ruler of Worst Nodes I'm also interested in helping others. This is not only a site for the competent hackers you imagine. It's also a site for beginners and knowledge seekers. Explicit examples like choroba and LanX produced serve the monastery infinitely better.

I have said many, many times SunnyD is often half right and that allows others to read into the wrong half and make assumptions or contortions or edge-cases to make it right. But half a cup of poison is still a problem and I am going to continue to slap it out of his hands when he offers it.

  • Comment on Re^6: Hash key composition with a comma?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^7: Hash key composition with a comma?
by LanX (Archbishop) on Mar 18, 2018 at 15:10 UTC
    I'm not sure it's him, he doesn't have a monopoly on half-truth and this stupidity has a slightly different flavor.

    Anyway continue to "slap it out"! :)

    Cheers Rolf
    (addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :)
    Wikisyntax for the Monastery

Re^7: Hash key composition with a comma?
by sauoq (Abbot) on Mar 18, 2018 at 16:19 UTC

    I don't know who posted it. But the content stands on its own. And what he said about the pitfalls was true even if his estimate of the danger was overblown.

    Yes, this is a place for beginners as well as competent hackers. And I agree that examples are better. But they aren't always necessary and not providing one isn't really cause for a berating, particularly on fundamental points. And if a beginner doesn't understand and would like an example, he could always ask for one, right? I assume you didn't actually need one and I question your attempt to test the AM.

    Not that any of this is as important as we are making it. You have a stated dislike for anonymous posting; I have a stated dislike for gratuitous pedantry. I think this thread brought up each of our pet peeves.

    -sauoq
    "My two cents aren't worth a dime.";
      …not providing one isn't really cause for a berating, particularly on fundamental points…

      This was my original request–

      Perhaps you could show how such a legacy code trap might work. Some code to demonstrate the issue.

      It's cromulent and it would have taken less effort to demonstrate for someone who knows any Perl than to go on and on about how it's clear to everyone. And regarding particularly on fundamental points, just no. Flat Earth is a thing. Complete disbelief in evolution is a thing. And hackers who put passwords in query strings or cookies, can't understand the most basic properties of numbers or data structures, and cause multi-million dollar breaches of data are most definitely a thing. As I said, if you or pretty much any named monk here had done the post, I wouldn't have objected, except perhaps to say, as you said, the urgency was hyperbolic. Twenty years in mostly on legacy Perl I never saw the problem once. As LanX said, there is some context lacking and probably I'm overly aggressive with the situation—syphilis recently called me out on it and was quite right—but I'm 100% done with that monk or anyone unidentifiable who sounds like him.

      Hi saouq

      > I don't know who posted it.

      You haven't posted since 2015 and might not know how damaging the workings of certain monks have become.

      So please be tolerant of some reflex answers...

      > I question your attempt to test the AM.

      I welcome it, because finding an example highlighted that this "meta-character problem" is far less dangerous than the usual ones.

      There are far too many dogmatisms in IT which need to be questioned.

      Cheers Rolf
      (addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :)
      Wikisyntax for the Monastery

        So please be tolerant of some reflex answers...

        I will not.

        No one needs to post by reflex. We'd all be served better by well-considered posts.

        Poor responses are best handled by writing good responses. (Which you did.) Attacking the author isn't helpful. Attacking them on weak points is even less so.

        While it's true I haven't posted here (except maybe for some of my own drive-by AM postings from time to time) since 2015... it's also true that I started posting here in 2002. We never had a shortage of monks posting bad info. I even have some recollection of sundialsvc4. Don't feed the trolls is as good advice now as ever.

        -sauoq
        "My two cents aren't worth a dime.";

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1211188]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others lurking in the Monastery: (4)
As of 2019-10-15 04:11 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    Notices?