in reply to Re: help deciphering SWF::Builder docs
in thread help deciphering SWF::Builder docs

I will never understand the need some people have to be actively unhelpful. If you have nothing to offer, kindly just move along.

To be clear: a link to the README explaining how to install the package is not helpful. I was not asking for help installing the package.

And while I agree, and it is a given, that I need to "learn more", I positively defy you, Anonymous Monk, whoever you are, to explain what the author means by:

"You should set DefineEditText flag Multiline and/or WordWrap"

and explain exactly how to do it.

Or, if you just want to be a smart-alecky link-poster, post a link to the part of the SWF::Element pod, to which the author refers, that explains it.

  • Comment on Re^2: help deciphering SWF::Builder docs

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: help deciphering SWF::Builder docs
by Anonymous Monk on Aug 28, 2007 at 03:22 UTC
[reply]
      OK, a couple things.

      1. While the "plong" link doesn't meet the criteria of explaining what the author meant by "You should set DefineEditText flag Multiline and/or WordWrap", I have to admit that it is the most helpful info I've encountered so far. However, the fact that the best example of anything even remotely helpful was a link to a script written by Teabag pretty much backs up my assertion that the module's own documentation is sorely lacking. Besides, what if Teabag had had the flu or something on that fine November day back in 2004 and didn't end up writing that script? Why, we'd all be living in Potterville now, that's what.

      2. I think if you go back and re-read my original post, you'll find it breezy and not at all disrespectful. But maybe that depends on how one defines "respectful." Correctly pointing out the fact that there is something in a module that is referred to in passing but is neither documented nor demonstrated, really doesn't seem disrespectful to me. If it were MY module, I'd want to thank the person who pointed that out.

      In any case, I put a fair amount of time, thought and effort into my original post, and a drive-by response posting a link to something completely irrelevant is actually kind of insulting, and I responded accordingly. But any reasonable person who carefully reads my original post would have to agree that there's not an ounce of disrespect in it. Because there isn't!

      Anyhow, thanks for the plong link. Hopefully it yields something enlightening.

[reply]
        In the end this turned out to be a wild goose chase, I'm afraid. But I just wanted to report my results here for the benefit of anyone who comes a-searchin this way in the future.

        The plong script provides a glimpse of a possibility, to be sure, but I don't possess the skill to reverse-engineer the plong script into a script that creates a box with a header, text and an image, where the text flows around the image.

        The frustrating thing is I suspect there IS a way to do it, but since the author of the SWF::Builder package chose not to document it, and since the perl community as a whole seems more tolerant of those who publish inadequately documented work than it is of those who say "better documentation, please!", I'm going to have to give up.

        And that means goodbye to Bedford Falls and ZuZu's petals and all that. Welcome to Potterville.

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom