Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
The documentation with the module itself is pretty thin, and just tends to point to MOP.
First you should read through the Manual if you haven't already. Then you can go on to read the Cookbook.
I think the docs are actually pretty good these days, as long as you read the right ones. You really shouldn't bother looking at most of the docs for any class name starting with "Moose::Meta" unless you're interested in Moose's introspection features. I've tried to make this more obvious in the Moose.pm docs, which as of 0.57 tell you to read the Manual and Cookbook first.
If you're coming from a background of doing Perl 5 OO "the old school way", I'd also suggest taking a look at the Moose::Manual::Unsweetened document, which compares Moose to equivalent Perl 5 "by hand" code.
http://moose.perl.org is a good central resource for all things Moose
Once you read the docs Dave mentioned, if you have some insight on how it could have been more approachable or gotten you off on the right foot (or simply been easier to find), perhaps you would like to contribute that to the documentation. The developers cannot really read the introductory documentation from a new user's point of view. So file a bug report (with a patch maybe) against the documentation and/or discuss it on the mailing list or irc channel. That will help the next person in your shoes.
I found this Moose Quick Reference sheet invaluable. I'm always forgetting in which manual section to look up a particular feature.
I too am just starting to move on to Moose. Since the term good can be rather subjective, I'll just detail what I found was good in these resources. The resources may be more or less helpful depending on your skills/experience in Perl.
I started off at this Perl Monks page. And moved straight into the Moose::Cookbok link listed at the bottom. There, the author included several more links to pods demonstrating Moose syntax and object-oriented programs. The ordering was put together well; starting with simple and basic OOP with Moose at the top, progressing to more complex examples as you go down the page. The pods are well written, aren't overly wordy, and explain each chunk of the code clearly.
I'm sure once you're done with the Cookbook, you could check out whatever else was listed at the Perl Monks page. I'm still going through the examples in the Cookbook, so I haven't checked all the resources listed at Perl Monks, but I'm sure they're good.
Related
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
Yes, while i'm working on node.js, i still love perl, :)
The old web product is based on old perl CGI, i'm looking to the simplest way to fix XSS/Sql injection/etc. web security holes, within a week including testing, :(
So for
Catalyst
Dancer
Mason
Maypole
Mojolicious
which one should i use in the ARM platform ?
Thank you !
You have fallen foul of the primarily opinion-based off-topic categorisation, and your question will probably be closed very soon. However I think it's worth offering a few guidelines here
First of all you should absorb what is written in CGI::Alternatives as it is a reasonable summary of the subject
Next you should separate the HTML generation functionality of your existing CGI code from the interface itself, and consider replacements for each of them separately. If you were to use HTML::Tiny together with CGI::Simple then your code would have to change very little and you would have achieved better partitioning of functionality
Ideally you will move on to one of the many templating systems such as Template Toolkit, together with one of the frameworks, which is the topic of your question. In the end you will need to do a lot of research and many trials to discover how well each framework fits your requirement, in terms of both the feature list and the convenience and clarity of the API
All I can do here is say that I am very fond of the Mojolicious suite and suggest that it may be a good starting point. The API focuses on command chaining in a way similar to Ruby, and there is a Mojolicious::Plugin::CGI accessory which will allow you to execute CGI scripts unchanged during your migration
Note however that all of the frameworks that you mention, as well as several others, will have their proponents. That is why you must make the selection yourself, as such recommendations will be influenced primarily by familiarity, and without your own knowledge of the requirements of your project
Unfortunately I cannot speak to the security issues of the various options, but I hope that has helped a little
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I have been evaluating DNN over a few months. It has it´s pros and cons. I find it hard to evaluate systems by reading articles and don´t have time to check them all on my own.
What are your general feeling about this?
As my background is with .net, which system would you choose?
Also, does anybody know if these pages at stack overflow is based on a CMS and if so which?
Since everyone would rather spend more time criticizing your post than answering it, I'll give it a shot.
You have a few options with building a portal. Either go with an established, open source portal (like DNN), look into some paid solutions or build your own.
Open Source - I've worked with DNN and MojoPortal. DNN is a little slower and has a few more requirements to develop skins and modules, but it has A LOT more features and some of the free/paid modules are really cool. Overall, DNN wins here, but if you don't need a large portal and you want to keep development really simple, MojoPortal might be better. MojoPortal has a few nice features that makes it easier to configure.
Open Source (Other) - There are tons of them out there. Orchard is one I'm thinking of because I'm interested in MVC. But, it's still young in terms of features and support.
Umbraco - I can't really speak to this because I have not used it, but it does have some popularity.
Build it - This is an option and allows the most flexibility, but it takes a lot of time and so many features that are built into these portals could be left out. Role based access, page management, page/module permissions, downloadable modules, profile/profile properties, file management, skinning, acct management, menu management, event logs, etc
I left out non .NET solutions like ones based on PHP, Grails, etc because you are a .NET developer. There is plenty out there, but sticking to .NET will help speed your development up.... unless you are just wanting to learn something new.
Hope this helps.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
I am contemplating writing a useful article in a field of my interest. There are many others (about 10-15) people interested in peer reviewing and collaborating on the same. I am not a prolific programmer, but I understand how GitHub works for version control.
Can I use it for writing a 4-5 page collaborative article (version control is very important part) or do you think a better alternative exists?
You certainly could, but I don't know if it's the best choice. A couple of questions come to mind. Is this a text-based document format or are you planning on doing your writing in something like MS Word? If the former then I think it could work well. If the latter I would say it may be less effective.
What about your other collaborators? Are they savvy enough to use a DVCS? That would have some influence as well. I don't know how strongly you need the document versioned, but I could see using git as overkill.
I've found that using Google Docs works well and has a revision history, although it's obviously not as robust as would be found in a VCS.
I think it would work great. The Ruby on Rails guides are on a publicly write/readable repository at GitHub, for instance. You get get Git things for free (branches, blame, general version control features), plus you'll have a reliable backup and publishing mechanism if you like.
Given that the contributers are computer literate enough to successfully use Git, that is.
If you write it in Markdown, you can throw inline HTML into it (just by itself like you can do on Stack Overflow). Easy to write, easy to style, etc.
You can, but on the other hand:
Most wikis allow rich-content pages easyly, are ready for collaborative editing and have versioning and version-management embedded in the core.
One promissing recent development is penflip (https://www.penflip.com/) which was created with the idea of being a "github for text".
Check this article to learn about the author's ideas http://madebyloren.com/github-for-writers
Consider using google docs. They have some kind of version control. And it is much more suitable for this kind of work.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I want to travel in the past and learn REXX, but I don't know where to start, then I want some help from someone that can point me to the right place to start.
Check IBM publib on the subject (which was (is still?) backed by REXX programmed application, at least, during my IBM times, a colleague maintained it). You can find there all free books in either HTML or PDF format. The REXX Guide (available as PDF or HTML) is good to get started. If you intend to run (emulate) it on Windows, I can recommend Regina Rexx.
Have a look at Open Object ReXX, which came out of IBM object ReXX. It's on SourceForge.
http://sourceforge.net/projects/oorexx/files/
Documentation starts here - http://www.oorexx.org/docs/
If you're willing to invest some time and money, this book is good (so is Mike Cowlishaw's, but I think that one's out of print and so could perhaps be pricey or slow to get). If you can't invest the time and/or money, this tutorial is fast-paced and quick to get through, and gives you good links to other resources.
Logic at
http://www.kilowattsoftware.com/tutorial/rexx/
Bible - from WROX
REXX Programmer's Reference - Howard Fosdick
Check out the many resources at the Rexx Language Association (www.rexxla.org), especially the links section.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I am looking for information on how to draw flame fractals from googling around I could not find much, either pages explain how to use third party tools or way too complicated for me to grasp. Anyone know how/why they work? or point me in the direction of not overly complicated implementations?
I have written a beamer presentation that covers the basics in flame fractals:
https://www.math.upenn.edu/~peal/files/Fractals[2009]Beamer[Eng]-PAXINUM.pdf
All images are done from my java implementation of the flame algorithm.
The source code can be found here:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/flamethyst/
I believe that the pdf http://flam3.com/flame_draves.pdf together with the implementation in java above should get you a long way.
You could read the original paper by Scott Draves, which details precisely how and why they work, as well as a guide to an implementation in pseudocode.
As long as you have some basic knowledge of maths, it should be relatively straightforward to understand (though it is rather long!). To be honest, you can probably ignore much of it and just read about the code, since much of the text is background info.
Fractal flames are basically a variant of an iterated function system (IFS). You have a series of functions through which you pass a single point over and over again. Each function is a combination of an affine transformation and one or more variations.
Each iteration, only one function is chosen (at random), and the resulting point is accumulated into a buffer and used as the starting point of the next iteration.
The buffer is then saved as an image, after having been post-processed and filtered, as described in the flame paper.
The best reference is still the original implementation, flam3.
I think fractals would be too computationally expensive to do in real time.
If I Google "simulating fire in computer graphics" I get a number of interesting things that suggest that it's not a trivial problem (surprise). SIGGRAPH is a conference whose proceedings you'll want to check out. But be warned - this is very mathematically challenging.
Have a look at http://formulas.ultrafractal.com/
There you can download the "Completed Formula Pack"
The file enr.ucl file should contain the formula for the flame fractal.
For more info:
http://www.ultrafractal.com/kb/flamefractals.html