There's more than one way to do things | |
PerlMonks |
Re: Re: x 3 perlcc?by crazyinsomniac (Prior) |
on Apr 21, 2002 at 13:12 UTC ( [id://160875]=note: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
2) I am not sure why my original post was so offensive to Juerd that he descided to throw a RTFM on me (what is the point of this forum then, I ask).I wonder how you gathered all that from a few lines of clean text (none was in bold or CAPS or funny colors and none outright called you any names or such). To me, an RTFM response is the first and only one. How to RTFM is an excellent guide on How to do it. When asking questions, you'll have to watch out for "it's broken" or "it doesn't work" without providing further information. Providing the error message you are getting is the first step and the least you could do. You could've also provided the code which is causing perlcc to fail, or at least enough of it to cause the problem. Also, telling us all the options you've exausted prevents, well, advice you know is not gonna work. Also, more good information at Before You Post ... and What makes a bad question? Furhtermore, I fail to see how my abi...*full*stop* Let's just stick to shop talk (ie perl). If we nip this in the bud right now, we'll all live happier. Don't read more into text than what it actually says. update: on a sidenote, meaningful node titles make reuse easier ~ that is, if you named your node something like "perlcc error : error text here?" anybody looking at the same error might find help here (I say might, cause, well, you know ;)
In Section
Seekers of Perl Wisdom
|
|