The "read this book" is not that big a deal to me anymore (I can ignore it in most cases), but when I saw:

Then, add "require 'dumpvar.pl';" at the top of your program, and use "dumpValue(ref);" to see how your data is stored.

First off what is 'dumpvar.pl'?

Where can someone get 'dumpvar.pl'?

You neither provide link, nor say it's part of the examples of the o'reilly book. Then you go to describe how to use dumpVal and what to expect. I didn't even factor in the fact Data::Dumper, like other have pointed out, has surpassed and replaced what dumpvar might once have held for the o'reilly readers (even thought it was only an example -- for learning purposes even).

Then you say

The reading was good, but what really helps me when I get lost in my code is to use dumpValue to see what's really going on.

Some might argue everybody has read How to RTFM and loves to use http://google.com/, and .... but I feel, that regardless of the skills of your posters skills, when talking about specific programs/modules/literature, it is best to provide links, or if common enough, say "thisorthat is common enough, that if you look for thisorthat in a search engine, you'll find tons of stuff about it."

Maybe I'm being harsh, or a hypocrite, or whatever, but that is what comes to mind as to *reasons*why* someone might -- you.

I hope this has been *insightful*

 

______crazyinsomniac_____________________________ Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most. perl -e "$q=$_;map({chr unpack qq;H*;,$_}split(q;;,q*H*));print;$q/$q;"

No problem with harsh. There was lots of good info for me in your reply. This is the kind of stuff I was looking for with my question.

As a side note to anyone doing a search... dumpvar.pl is a part of the perl distribution. I've always found it anywhere I went. I'll give Data::Dumper a try and catch up with the rest of the world ;-)

Thanks to all for the time and thought put into your replies!

MungeMeister

As a side note to anyone doing a search... dumpvar.pl is a part of the perl distribution. I've always found it anywhere I went. I'll give Data::Dumper a try and catch up with the rest of the world ;-)

So it is. A quick glance reveals that merlyn had his hand in it, but also that is requires 5.002 which suggests (to me at least) thats its a touch out of date.

Personally I would stick to Data::Dumper or my preference these days Data::Dump which is similer but has some traits I prefer (such as not having an annoying problem with memory leaks under the AS builds.).

Yves / DeMerphq
--
When to use Prototypes?

I don't downvote terribly often; when I do, I try to either /msg the poster in the Chatterbox, or post a follow-up explaining why I downvoted the node. Admittedly, I don't do this as often as I probably should; in some cases, a post will come off as trollish or gratuitously immature, in which case I doubt that my explanation will lead to a rational discussion on self-improvement.

As for your node, it's a bit densely formatted and difficult to read (code tags would make the second paragraph a bit more legible), and Data::Dumper is preferred over Srinivasan's dumpvar.pl (the latter, if I recall correctly, was meant as an illustration of how references work, not a serious programming tool), but those don't strike me as good reasons to downvote the node.

I usually only -- nodes that are insulting, extremely poorly written, or just a need a push to be reaped (such as a duplicate put up for consideration by its author). If I find what I think is an egregious error in a writeup, I'll post a reply. In the particular case of the node you mention, I didn't downvote it, but I didn't upvote it either. I thought it wasn't terribly informative, and didn't directly address what the questioner was asking. Nonetheless, there's nothing wrong with it; I let it be.

Now that doesn't say anything about how others use their votes. Some are probably new monks who are trying to figure out how the voting system works, and you ended up being part of their learning process. That's part of why I scan Best nodes and Worst nodes, looking for anything that may be getting unfair treatment. IMHO, if you mean to give feedback with a --, a courtesy /msg explaining what you thought was wrong is important. Otherwise people are left wondering.

And if all else fails, just remember the explanation I read in CB a long time ago (forgot the attribution, sorry)

I find some people here are wankers.

I too received a couple of negative votes for on-topic helpful information (these were later nullified by many more positive votes). My feeling is that these votes were either issued by people who don't totally understand the voting system as VSarkiss mentioned or by people who are being mischievous.

metadoktor

"The doktor is in."

heh. i made two mistakes in my reasoning. the first was equating xp with skill/smarts/ability/etc. that's not the point of xp. the second mistake in my reasoning was that, at my rate, i'd have to be a member for 6 quadrillion years to gain that amount of xp. also, knowing that vroom can pretty much do what he wants behind the scenes --it's his site--, i'd have to take him out. after a few silly daydreams, i decided it's not worth all that. :) besides, i certainly wouldn't want to fill his shoes.

here are a few related nodes that i'm aware of:

Voting Guidelines (or 'How should I spend my votes?')
Voting <-- excellent resources provided by footpad and jtpxs
Showing node writer's XP level
On Monkness (mine, anyway)

~Particle

You hit some of it. As is obvious, I'm new, and there is a certain thrill to gaining XP.

But what bothered me was that someone had a problem with a post, without telling me what that problem is. That's part of the voting, and I understand that. But I also wabt to be a useful member of PM, which means I need to learn. I can't learn from a --. I can learn from posts like these, especially this crazyinsomniac's.

Thanks for the links! I've got some reading to do.....

MungeMeister