Re^4: chop vs chomp

[Moron]

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

[Fletch]

You persist in raising the strawman of using chomp on non-record oriented input. Yes, if you've got non-line oriented files you shouldn't be trying to process it line-by-line and using chomp. And if you look you'll find that probably most of the regulars telling you you're off your chum are the first to, for instance, point someone at HTML::TokeParser when someone's attempting to treat HTML as line oriented input.

However if you persist in insisting that a sawzall is all you ever use and that everyone else is wrong in not using them as well for everything they might be doing as well (vascular surgery, engine maintenence, animal husbandry) you can't expect to be taken seriously.

Update: Changed first "non-line oriented" to the more generic "non-record oriented".

[Chady]

I downvoted you for attacking me, instead of talking about what I wrote in my post.

My point is, which you clearly don't want to see given that so many others have been trying to uselessly make you understand, is that you are micro-managing a feature, that YOU yourself created, because it doesn't fit your original design, and instead of admitting that your original design is flawed because it is based on some wild assumption, you still insist on generalizing that the feature is wrong to use in all other situations.

I was going to come up with an alternative example, but shmem already gave an excellent one (the one about autovivification).

Now let's please hear about how stupid I am, and how much I'm still lacking in knowledge about all this "computer" stuff... oh.. and about my bad english too.