perl.perl6.porters archive

206 archived articles, newest first (page 2 of 3). Latest articles →

Neat site: Advogato
Tue, 4 Apr 2000 13:19:07 -0700
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #106
Reports of Topaz' release are greatly exaggerated
Tue, 4 Apr 2000 13:15:56 -0700
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #105
Developer's Workshop 4.0 - "Perl Porters On Ice!"
Sat, 1 Apr 2000 15:21:04 -0800
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #104
RE: The C++ wizardy of the Perl gods
Fri, 17 Mar 2000 09:28:39 -0600
[email protected] ("A. C. Yardley") • #103
Re: [ID 20000308.003] bug in the 'exists' function
Sun, 12 Mar 2000 15:40:10 -0500
[email protected] (Joshua N Pritikin) • #102
Re: g++ fall down, go boom.
Tue, 7 Mar 2000 14:15:55 -0800
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #101
Re: g++ fall down, go boom.
Tue, 7 Mar 2000 17:06:16 -0500
[email protected] (John Porter) • #100
Re: g++ fall down, go boom.
Tue, 7 Mar 2000 11:20:11 -0800
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #99
g++ fall down, go boom.
Tue, 7 Mar 2000 13:31:15 -0500
[email protected] (Michael G Schwern) • #98
PUNY Reminder, to-nite 6:00pm IBM 57th and Mad, Rm 950
Tue, 22 Feb 2000 08:54:10 -0800 (PST)
[email protected] ("John van V.") • #97
PUNY first meeting, New Plans- Double Event
Tue, 15 Feb 2000 11:44:31 -0800 (PST)
[email protected] ("John van V.") • #96
Perl SIG, First meeting Tue, Feb 22 6:00 @ IBM, 57th and Mad Ave
Fri, 11 Feb 2000 10:43:46 -0800 (PST)
[email protected] ("John van V.") • #95
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Sat, 5 Feb 2000 15:07:17 -0500 (EST)
[email protected] (Ilya Zakharevich) • #94
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Sat, 5 Feb 2000 08:41:09 -0800 (PST)
[email protected] (Larry Wall) • #93
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Sat, 5 Feb 2000 08:18:31 -0800 (PST)
[email protected] (Larry Wall) • #92
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Sat, 5 Feb 2000 13:36:56 +0100
[email protected] (Bart Schuller) • #91
Re: Locales: An Analysis
05 Feb 2000 11:38:04 +0100
[email protected] ((Johan Vromans)) • #90
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 4 Feb 2000 16:38:40 -0500
[email protected] (Ilya Zakharevich) • #89
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 4 Feb 2000 16:37:09 -0500
[email protected] (Ilya Zakharevich) • #88
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 04 Feb 2000 12:26:06 -0700
[email protected] (Tom Christiansen) • #87
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 4 Feb 2000 11:21:36 -0800 (PST)
[email protected] (Larry Wall) • #86
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 04 Feb 2000 12:16:19 -0700
[email protected] (Tom Christiansen) • #85
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 4 Feb 2000 10:55:58 -0800 (PST)
[email protected] (Larry Wall) • #84
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 4 Feb 2000 10:33:04 -0800 (PST)
[email protected] (Larry Wall) • #83
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 04 Feb 2000 10:33:53 -0800
[email protected] (Gurusamy Sarathy) • #82
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 4 Feb 2000 13:18:18 -0500
[email protected] (Ilya Zakharevich) • #81
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 4 Feb 2000 19:53:46 +0200 (EET)
[email protected] (Jarkko Hietaniemi) • #80
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 4 Feb 2000 09:52:20 -0800 (PST)
[email protected] (Larry Wall) • #79
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 4 Feb 2000 12:49:53 -0500
[email protected] (Ilya Zakharevich) • #78
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 4 Feb 2000 12:48:18 -0500
[email protected] (Ilya Zakharevich) • #77
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 04 Feb 2000 09:21:04 -0800
[email protected] (Tim Bray) • #76
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 4 Feb 2000 09:22:08 -0800 (PST)
[email protected] (Larry Wall) • #75
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 4 Feb 2000 09:05:51 -0800 (PST)
[email protected] (Larry Wall) • #74
Re: Locales: An Analysis
04 Feb 2000 05:06:14 -0800
[email protected] (Russ Allbery) • #73
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 4 Feb 2000 10:40:15 +0200 (EET)
[email protected] (Jarkko Hietaniemi) • #72
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 4 Feb 2000 00:34:29 -0800
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #71
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 4 Feb 2000 00:25:42 -0800
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #70
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 4 Feb 2000 10:22:58 +0200 (EET)
[email protected] (Jarkko Hietaniemi) • #69
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 4 Feb 2000 00:12:25 -0800
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #68
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Thu, 3 Feb 2000 23:26:47 -0800 (PST)
[email protected] (Larry Wall) • #67
Re: Locales: An Analysis
Fri, 4 Feb 2000 01:35:58 -0500
[email protected] (Ilya Zakharevich) • #66
Locales: An Analysis
Thu, 3 Feb 2000 20:35:04 -0800
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #65
Re: Way Cool: Topaz 0.10 runs code!
Wed, 2 Feb 2000 06:25:49 -0800
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #64
Re: Way Cool: Topaz 0.10 runs code!
Wed, 2 Feb 2000 03:58:31 -0500 (EST)
[email protected] (John Tobey) • #63
Way Cool: Topaz 0.10 runs code!
Tue, 1 Feb 2000 14:00:55 -0800
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #62
Where can I find the actual code for 'reverse' function in perl
Fri, 14 Jan 2000 08:06:10 +0000
[email protected] (Jong Park) • #61
Re: New Year! New Topaz Snapshot! New Project Home!
Wed, 12 Jan 2000 13:03:23 -0500 (EST)
[email protected] (John Tobey) • #60
Re: Perl development with Perl
Fri, 7 Jan 100 20:41:16 -0500 (EST)
[email protected] (Ken Fox) • #59
Perl development with Perl
Fri, 07 Jan 2000 21:43:55 +0000
[email protected] (Jong Park) • #58
Re: New Year! New Topaz Snapshot! New Project Home!
03 Jan 2000 17:52:13 -0500
[email protected] (William Setzer) • #57
Binaries of egcs for building Topaz
Sat, 1 Jan 2000 15:08:33 -0800
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #56
New Year! New Topaz Snapshot! New Project Home!
Fri, 31 Dec 1999 21:56:56 -0800
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #55
Re: [GCC] new inliner
Sun, 19 Dec 1999 15:57:11 +0000
[email protected] (Nick Ing-Simmons) • #54
Re: [GCC] new inliner
Mon, 13 Dec 1999 13:05:54 -0500
[email protected] (Joshua N Pritikin) • #53
Re: [GCC] new inliner
Mon, 13 Dec 1999 09:13:17 -0800 (PST)
[email protected] ("John van V.") • #52
[GCC] new inliner
Mon, 13 Dec 1999 11:35:16 -0500
[email protected] (Joshua N Pritikin) • #51
Re: threads in general
Tue, 16 Nov 1999 05:22:29 -0800 (PST)
[email protected] ("John van V.") • #50
ExOS
Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:11:59 -0800 (PST)
[email protected] ("John van V.") • #49
Re: threads in general
Thu, 11 Nov 1999 22:48:14 +0000
[email protected] (Alan Burlison) • #48
Re: threads in general
Thu, 11 Nov 1999 22:41:37 +0000
[email protected] (Tim Bunce) • #47
Re: threads in general
Thu, 11 Nov 1999 21:27:25 +0000
[email protected] (Alan Burlison) • #46
threads in general
Thu, 11 Nov 1999 14:49:22 -0600 (CST)
[email protected] (Ed Peschko) • #45
Seeking volunteer to providing mailing list summaries
Wed, 10 Nov 1999 17:14:58 -0700
[email protected] (Tom Christiansen) • #44
Re: Linux: the next Evil Empire? ;)
Thu, 21 Oct 1999 10:37:13 -0400
[email protected] (John Porter) • #43
Linux: the next Evil Empire? ;)
Wed, 20 Oct 1999 17:34:29 -0400 (EDT)
[email protected] (Ken Fox) • #42
Re: Topaz and Regular Expressions
Wed, 20 Oct 1999 11:18:24 -0700
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #41
Re: Topaz and Regular Expressions
Wed, 20 Oct 1999 12:18:56 -0500 (CDT)
[email protected] (Ed Peschko) • #40
Re: Topaz and Regular Expressions
Wed, 20 Oct 1999 10:15:06 -0400
[email protected] (John Porter) • #39
Re: Topaz and Regular Expressions
Tue, 19 Oct 1999 21:37:28 -0400 (EDT)
[email protected] (Ken Fox) • #38
Re: Topaz and Regular Expressions
Tue, 19 Oct 1999 15:47:16 -0700
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #37
Re: Topaz and Regular Expressions
Tue, 19 Oct 1999 18:16:59 -0500 (CDT)
[email protected] (Ed Peschko) • #36
Re: The lexer (was RE: Topaz and Regular Expressions)
Mon, 18 Oct 1999 11:41:21 -0700
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #35
Re: The lexer (was RE: Topaz and Regular Expressions)
Mon, 18 Oct 1999 14:28:14 -0400
[email protected] (John Porter) • #34
The lexer (was RE: Topaz and Regular Expressions)
Mon, 18 Oct 1999 14:13:32 -0400
[email protected] ("WORENKLEIN, David, GCM") • #33
Re: Topaz and Regular Expressions
Mon, 18 Oct 1999 11:13:59 -0700
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #32
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Sun, 17 Oct 1999 15:57:58 -0700
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #31
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Fri, 15 Oct 1999 10:25:54 -0400 (EDT)
[email protected] (Ken Fox) • #30
Topaz and Regular Expressions
Fri, 15 Oct 1999 12:09:17 -0500 (CDT)
[email protected] (Ed Peschko) • #29
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Thu, 14 Oct 1999 13:35:46 -0700
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #28
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Thu, 14 Oct 1999 13:22:37 -0700
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #27
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Thu, 14 Oct 1999 21:33:15 +0100
[email protected] (Nick Ing-Simmons) • #26
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Thu, 14 Oct 1999 15:55:39 -0400 (EDT)
[email protected] (Ken Fox) • #25
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Wed, 13 Oct 1999 23:03:14 -0700
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #24
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Wed, 13 Oct 1999 20:35:00 -0500
[email protected] (Graham Barr) • #23
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Wed, 13 Oct 1999 20:52:58 -0400 (EDT)
[email protected] (Ken Fox) • #22
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Wed, 13 Oct 1999 15:13:50 -0700
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #21
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Wed, 13 Oct 1999 15:02:13 -0700
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #20
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Wed, 13 Oct 1999 16:24:43 -0500
[email protected] (Graham Barr) • #19
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Wed, 13 Oct 1999 17:19:24 -0400 (EDT)
[email protected] (Ken Fox) • #18
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Wed, 13 Oct 1999 17:12:13 -0400
[email protected] (Joshua N Pritikin) • #17
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Wed, 13 Oct 1999 14:10:07 -0700
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #16
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Wed, 13 Oct 1999 15:55:46 -0500
[email protected] (Graham Barr) • #15
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Wed, 13 Oct 1999 13:20:33 -0700
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #14
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Wed, 13 Oct 1999 16:08:48 -0400
[email protected] (John Porter) • #13
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Wed, 13 Oct 1999 12:32:23 -0700
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #12
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Wed, 13 Oct 1999 04:28:36 -0700
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #11
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Wed, 13 Oct 1999 15:09:49 -0400
[email protected] (Joshua N Pritikin) • #10
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Wed, 13 Oct 1999 04:22:59 -0700
[email protected] (Chip Salzenberg) • #9
Re: Tying sub arguments is rare?
Wed, 13 Oct 1999 05:51:46 +0100
[email protected] ("M.J.T. Guy") • #8
Tying sub arguments is rare?
Tue, 12 Oct 1999 16:32:32 -0400 (EDT)
[email protected] (Ken Fox) • #7
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.