Re: pack/unpack is damn unperlish. Explain them as Perl.

2000-09-19 Thread Buddha Buck
At 07:29 AM 9/19/00 -0700, Dave Storrs wrote: > I guess, if I had to write an explanation of pack/unpack based on >my limited understanding, it would be something like: > > "Unpack takes binary data in some particular format and >disassembles it, assigning various pieces of it to v

Re: pack/unpack is damn unperlish. Explain them as Perl.

2000-09-19 Thread Sam Tregar
On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Dave Storrs wrote: > "Unpack takes binary data in some particular format and > disassembles it, assigning various pieces of it to variables according to > formatting that you supply. Pack does the opposite, using your supplied > formatting to crunch Perl scalar variabl

Re: pack/unpack is damn unperlish. Explain them as Perl.

2000-09-19 Thread Dave Storrs
On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Michael G Schwern wrote: > I'm sure there are many times when pack should have been used but it > got hacked together with something else. The prime example is [...] I must admit I'm with Michael on this one. I've been writing Perl on and off for two or three ye

Re: pack/unpack is damn unperlish. Explain them as Perl.

2000-09-18 Thread Sam Tregar
On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Michael G Schwern wrote: > On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 12:32:08PM -0400, Sam Tregar wrote: > > If I grok'd the bastards, I'd write the explaination myself. If you grok'd the bastards I bet you'd realize how useless such an explanation would be. The chief reason for using pack/

Re: pack/unpack is damn unperlish. Explain them as Perl.

2000-09-18 Thread Nathan Torkington
Michael G Schwern writes: > You can do it! While it seems "food" and "supermarket" are critical > to the understanding of a shopping-cart, they're really just > incedental. I'm saying the same thing about un/pack! > > If I grok'd the bastards, I'd write the explaination myself. Please take thi

Re: pack/unpack is damn unperlish. Explain them as Perl.

2000-09-18 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 10:54:04AM -0700, Peter Scott wrote: > I don't see how you could possibly do it without that any more than you can > use numbers without understanding the range limits of integers and floating > point roundoff. You ignore that incidental detail until later on in the docs

Re: pack/unpack is damn unperlish. Explain them as Perl.

2000-09-18 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 12:32:08PM -0400, Sam Tregar wrote: > "Describe to me how you use a supermarket shopping-cart in terms of a > hardware store. Don't mention any words for food. Just talk about nuts > and bolts." "When shopping for tools, a shopping-cart is the thing you carry your tools

Re: pack/unpack is damn unperlish. Explain them as Perl.

2000-09-18 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 12:31:34PM -0400, Casey R. Tweten wrote: > I think pack/unpack are perlish enough. Especially if we believe that > printf/sprintf are perlish. Interpolation is perlish. printf and sprintf are not. And for similar reasons as pack/unpack. "%e a floating-point number, in

Re: pack/unpack is damn unperlish. Explain them as Perl.

2000-09-18 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 11:23:21AM -0400, John Porter wrote: > Uh huh... Are you prepared to write an explanation of Perl arrays > without making any mention of Perl scalars? "An array is a container for a list. Items in the list can be added, changed and removed, taken off and put onto both en

Re: pack/unpack is damn unperlish. Explain them as Perl.

2000-09-18 Thread Peter Scott
At 02:53 AM 9/18/00 -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote: >Perhaps someone could attempt to write an explaination of pack and >unpack in completely Perl terms. No bits, no ints, no nybbles, no >IEEE floating point arithmetic, no prior knowledge of C necessary. I don't see how you could possibly do it

Re: pack/unpack is damn unperlish. Explain them as Perl.

2000-09-18 Thread Casey R. Tweten
Today around 12:32pm, Sam Tregar hammered out this masterpiece: : On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Michael G Schwern wrote: : : > Perhaps someone could attempt to write an explaination of pack and : > unpack in completely Perl terms. No bits, no ints, no nybbles, no : > IEEE floating point arithmetic, no p

Re: pack/unpack is damn unperlish. Explain them as Perl.

2000-09-18 Thread Sam Tregar
On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Michael G Schwern wrote: > Perhaps someone could attempt to write an explaination of pack and > unpack in completely Perl terms. No bits, no ints, no nybbles, no > IEEE floating point arithmetic, no prior knowledge of C necessary. > Those are not Perl. Scalars, arrays, hash

Re: pack/unpack is damn unperlish. Explain them as Perl.

2000-09-18 Thread John Porter
Michael G Schwern wrote: > > Perhaps someone could attempt to write an explaination of pack and > unpack in completely Perl terms. No bits, no ints, no nybbles, Uh huh... Are you prepared to write an explanation of Perl arrays without making any mention of Perl scalars? -- John Porter