Re: cgi buffer flush

[io]

note the "\r\n\r\n" can be safely written as "\n\n" as perl will convert them when you are on windows. Thus making your code more portable. to flush to buffer, just put $|++ in the head of your script. Offcourse, if you really want the text to appear after 10 seconds i'd use javascript.

[fuzzyping]

Isn't "$|++" the same as "$|=1"?

-fuzzyping

[dorko]

Isn't "$|++" the same as "$|=1"?

A lot of people seem to think it is, but it's not.

• $|++ adds one to the current value of $|.
• $| = 1 sets the value of $| equal to one.
If for some reason $| = -1, doing a $|++ will make $| = 0, and usually that is not what $|++ is meant to do.

$| = 1 is much safer and more straight forward (less ambiguous?).

Update: Whoops. I was way wrong. A thousand lashes to me for misleading my fellows due to my neglectful ignorance. Thanks to dvergin for the correction and for setting me straight..

Cheers!

Brent

-- Yeah, I'm a Delt.

[dvergin]

      If for some reason $| = -1,...

No. Please don't make assertions like that when you haven't tested them.

$| is magic. It always equals either zero or one. Nothing else. Behold:

print "$|\n";      # 0

$| = -1;
print "$|\n";      # 1

$|++;
print "$|\n";      # 1

$|++;
print "$|\n";      # 1

$|--;
print "$|\n";      # 0

$|--;
print "$|\n";      # 1

$|--;
print "$|\n";      # 0

As you can see, $|++ always sets $| to one (no matter what it was) and $|-- always toggles it.

I agree that $| = 1; is more clear to newer programmers. But rationalle for that usage has to do with the learning curve and not with the behavior of $|.

------------------------------------------------------------
"Perl is a mess and that's good because the
problem space is also a mess." - Larry Wall

[fuzzyping]

Makes perfect sense, but under what circumstances would $|=-1, unless those where you specifically defined it as such? I can see where it would be a much better idea to use $|=1 so you don't mistakenly define $| to 2 (or higher).

OTOH, why haven't more folks discussed the use of the FileHandle or IO modules that support the autoflush method? Wouldn't that negate this argument altogether?

-fuzzyping

[zengargoyle]

"\r\n" is correct in this case. I'm pretty sure it's in the HTTP specs as the official line terminator. I think servers might take "\n", but they don't have to. Telnet is the same way.