in reply to Re^4: Perl && threads && queues - how to make all this work together
in thread Perl && threads && queues - how to make all this work together

Hm. I was in tune with your initial admonishment, but now you're belabouring the point. Ike is hardly the first, nor the most frequent (that'd probably be me!), person to have misread a post.

You'd do well to remember, that given 99 times out of 100 (made up statistic), you get the (correct) gist of a post at the first reading, (and he does), there is no trigger to cause you to doubt your interpretation of it. So why would you?

He acknowledged his error, so back off!

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
"I'd rather go naked than blow up my ass"
  • Comment on Re^5: Perl && threads && queues - how to make all this work together

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: Perl && threads && queues - how to make all this work together
by Anonymous Monk on Feb 15, 2010 at 11:55 UTC
    not sure how responding to a direct question is belabouring the point (granted the response was not so direct, but it was a somewhat-indirect response to a rather-indirect response to my initial comments). nonetheless, i do understand that it is possible to jump to the wrong conclusion when making a quick read (and even re-read) of posted code. and what i'm suggesting is that there are other helpful tools that one should use to verify one's initial diagnosis. and using those tools is especially appropriate when preparing to post a response that says that the OP is doing something wrong.
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom