Re: Password Generation and Module Multiplication

Just an aside... this seems overly complex:

[qw( . ! / \ - : ; " ' ? $ ^ & @ [ ] = + | < > % * ~ ) , qw/ ( ) /, ',
+', '#'],
[download]

why didn't you just write:

[qw( . ! / \ - : ; " ' ? $ ^ & @ [ ] = + | < > % * ~ , # ( ) )],
[download]

since qw's can nest for those parens, or even something like:

[map chr, 32..47, 58..63, 123..126]
[download]

to really get all of the "other" characters.

-- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119.

Comment on Re: Password Generation and Module Multiplication Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Password Generation and Module Multiplication by JavaFan (Canon) on Nov 22, 2010 at 22:14 UTC
Or just use `{}` as delimiters, as they aren't allowed chars. However, I'd write it as: `[split //, q{.!/\-:;"'?$^&@[]=+\|>?%*~.#()}]` [download] which doesn't trigger silly warnings because of the use of ',' and '#' inside qw. Besides, qw to get individual characters looks so awkward.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^2: Password Generation and Module Multiplication by Orsmo (Beadle) on Nov 22, 2010 at 22:11 UTC
Fair enough on the complexity of the "other" characters line. It is spelled out with explicit characters specifically to make it easier to add or remove given characters from the list. At the time, I think I had some warning that came up with the nested parens. Unfortunately my memory is a bit vague on that point. Those may simply have due to been a typo at the time. I will say though that with the use of "use strict; use warnings;" I do get at least the following warning: `Possible attempt to separate words with commas at test line X.` I'm sure there are more elegant ways to write the list though, including your fine use of map chr.	[reply]
Re^3: Password Generation and Module Multiplication by merlyn (Sage) on Nov 23, 2010 at 15:59 UTC
At the time, I think I had some warning that came up with the nested parens. Which is why, in general, I don't add "use warnings" to the code I write. Sometimes, it finds useful things, but the only time it triggers for me now, it's simply annoying. If you find yourself changing the code you write to be more obscure or hard to maintain because warnings are warning you, warnings have failed. -- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119.	[reply]
Re^4: Password Generation and Module Multiplication by sundialsvc4 (Abbot) on Nov 24, 2010 at 14:29 UTC
Per contra, I always specify: `use strict; use warnings;` ... and if there is any exception to that rule, I will place a `no warnings "foo";` directive thereafter. (If the unwanted warnings occur only in a specific block of code, the directive is placed on that block of code, then countermanded... and descriptive comments abound. In my experience, the `warnings` are usually correct; sometimes even prescient. Computers simply don’t “overlook” things like aging humans do.	[reply]
Re^4: Password Generation and Module Multiplication by ysth (Canon) on Nov 28, 2010 at 07:57 UTC
I have to agree here. "Possible..." warnings really should only be given where there is a trivial change needed to get the warning to shut up. In this case, I'd say the warning shouldn't trip when , is preceded by whitespace. -- A math joke: r = \| \|csc(θ)\|+\|sec(θ)\|-\|\|csc(θ)\|-\|sec(θ)\|\| \| Online Fortune Cookie Search Office Space merchandise	[reply]
Re^5: Password Generation and Module Multiplication (qw warnings) by tye (Sage) on Nov 29, 2010 at 03:28 UTC


Do you know where your variables are?
	PerlMonks