$first || ($use_second && $second) || '';

You've sent 50 emails to [Email Removed]?

I get no spam from this list ever, maybe it's coming
from someone who harvested your email address from a web site or something?

What are the headers and ip addresses, I doubt it's coming from the
real beginners list or else I'd have gotton spam also since I've
subscribed for a while now.

I never have and the list hasn't either. It's got to be a harvesting
bot, virus, etc... Maybe your IncrediMail or Kazaa or somethgin has spyware in it?

HTH

DMuey

> 2003 www.hushport.com

Maybe next time :)

Have you tried use strict and use warnigns in your scripts?
Also perl -c script.pl is helpfule and then the perl debugger itself:
perl -d

I'm sure their's thrid party stuff but I never use any,
the above does plenty for my needs.

HTH

Dmuey

Hi Casey,

I think there is one point that I have not seen presented here. Unfortunately,
many *real* spammers abuse the courtesy [or legal requirement?] of unsubscribe
information, and actually use it as a probe to detect live addresses. At least
many people believe that this is so. Some people may fear that they would only
get enmeshed more deeply by using the unsubscribe link.

Thanks for re-asserting the standards of kindness for the list.

Joseph

The key is in the docs you posted, specifically, "will provide a help
message using module Pod::Usage", I would suggest you have a look at the
docs for that module it should clear things up nicely. Particularly have
a look at the section "Recommended Use" that should help even more. I
have had good luck combining the two, though was unaware that this could
be handled automagically for me, very cool, I usually just code it in to
catch --help and -h and call pod2usage explicitly, god Perl+CPAN rocks...

I posted a template that takes advantage of this strategy late last year
if you want to check the archives, or e-mail me off list and I will fire
you a copy....

http://danconia.org

The practical reason is likely to be historical, but Larry would tell you
all
about the value of redundancy in the syntax of spoken, written and computer
languages. Perl is full of it (for instance 'use English' and then $ARG
is the same thing as $_) and it goes a long way towards making the language
what it is. Not forgetting TMTOWTDI of course!

Rob

Yuo need the module
use IO::Socket;

$sock = IO::Socket::INET->new(PeerAddr => $server,

PeerPort => $port,
Proto => 'tcp');

Not so distant by C socket :-) .
You can try this sochet with this simple script underneath
it's a simple tcp port scanner .
Hope this can help u.
Cya.

Go.


#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use IO::Socket;
use strict;

my ($line, $port, $sock, $range, $splitted, @servers, @splitted);
my $VERSION='1.0';

my $pid = 0;
my($server, $begin, $end, $processes) = @ARGV;


&usage if (!$server);
$begin = 0 if (!$begin);
$end = 65000 if (!$end);
$processes = 2 if ((!$processes) || ($processes<2));


print "Scanning from $begin to $endn";


for ($port=$begin;$port<=$end;$port++) {
&scan;

if ($sock){
print "Connected on port $portn";
}
else{
print "$port not connectedn";
}
}

sub usage{
print "Usage: portscan hostname [start at port number]n";
exit(0);

}
sub scan{

$sock = IO::Socket::INET->new(PeerAddr => $server,

PeerPort => $port,
Proto => 'tcp');
}

Yuo need the module
use IO::Socket;

$sock = IO::Socket::INET->new(PeerAddr => $server,

PeerPort => $port,
Proto => 'tcp');

Not so distant by C socket :-) .
You can try this sochet with this simple script underneath
it's a simple tcp port scanner .
Hope this can help u.
Cya.

Go.


#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use IO::Socket;
use strict;

my ($line, $port, $sock, $range, $splitted, @servers, @splitted);
my $VERSION='1.0';

my $pid = 0;
my($server, $begin, $end, $processes) = @ARGV;


&usage if (!$server);
$begin = 0 if (!$begin);
$end = 65000 if (!$end);
$processes = 2 if ((!$processes) || ($processes<2));


print "Scanning from $begin to $endn";


for ($port=$begin;$port<=$end;$port++) {
&scan;

if ($sock){
print "Connected on port $portn";
}
else{
print "$port not connectedn";
}
}

sub usage{
print "Usage: portscan hostname [start at port number]n";
exit(0);

}
sub scan{

$sock = IO::Socket::INET->new(PeerAddr => $server,

PeerPort => $port,
Proto => 'tcp');
}


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [Email Removed]
For additional commands, e-mail: [Email Removed]
<http://learn.perl.org/> <http://learn.perl.org/first-response>

--As for the rest, it is mine.

Don't bother doing both: it will just mean you have an extra copy of
Perl on your system. (And a non-standard one at that: Panther
includes a normal Perl build, which you couldn't quite do under Jag.)

Upgrade Perl if you need the new version of Perl and don't plan on
upgrading Mac OS X soon. Otherwise, just take the standard build in
Panther, which was up to date at the time of Panther's release. (If
you want to upgrade afterwards just use the normal Perl upgrade
instructions.)

Daniel T. Staal

---------------------------------------------------------------
This email copyright the author. Unless otherwise noted, you
are expressly allowed to retransmit, quote, or otherwise use
the contents for non-commercial purposes. This copyright will
expire 5 years after the author's death, or in 30 years,
whichever is longer, unless such a period is in excess of
local copyright law.
---------------------------------------------------------------

default .

for scan the ports on more process atm 2 no more.
if u uncomment the "elses" can look also closed port with a different color.
Hope can help u .
Cya.

Go.

#!/usr/bin/perl -w

#Written by *SAFFIOTI GOFFREDO*
#script for scannning of open socket on ports.
use IO::Socket;
use IPC::Open2;
use Term::ANSIColor;
use POSIX ":sys_wait_h";

my ($port, $sock, @servers);

my $pid = 0;
my($server, $begin, $end) = @ARGV;

&usage if (!$server);
$begin = 0 if (!$begin);
$end = 65000 if (!$end);

print "Scanning from $begin to $endn";

my $status;
$pid = fork;

if ($pid != 0) {
# for ($port=$begin;$port<=(($begin + $end)/2);$port++) {
for ($port=$begin;$port<=(($end)/2);$port++) {
&scan;;
if ( $sock ) {
print color 'bold blue';
print " Connected on port $portn";
# print "$!";
}# else {
#print color 'bold blue';
#print " $port not connectedn";
#}
}
my $childpid;
# $status = 1;


while ($status = waitpid(-1, WNOHANG)> 0) {
wait;
}
}
else
{

# for ($port=(($begin + $end)/2);$port<=$end;$port++){
for ($port=($end/2)+1;$port<=$end;$port++){
&scan;
if ( $sock ) {
print color 'bold white';
print " Connected on port $portn ";
}# else {
# print color 'bold white';
# print " $port not connectedn";
#}
}
}


sub usage{
print "Usage: portscan hostname [start from port to port number]n";
exit(0);
}

sub scan{
$sock = IO::Socket::INET->new(PeerAddr => $server,
PeerPort => $port,
Proto => 'tcp');
}

------------------------------------------------------------
The information contained in or attached to this email is
intended only for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed. If you are not the intended
recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are not authorised to and must not
disclose, copy, distribute, or retain this message or any
part of it. It may contain information which is confidential
and/or covered by legal professional or other privilege (or
other rules or laws with similar effect in jurisdictions
outside England and Wales).
The views expressed in this email are not necessarily the
views of Centrica plc, and the company, its directors,
officers or employees make no representation or accept any
liability for its accuracy or completeness unless expressly
stated to the contrary.

Afterwards I plan on moving upward and onward in perl. I'm curious if
Oreilly's "Programming Perl" or "Perl Cookbook" would be good to jump
into. Or is there another book I should study?

In the past I would have suggested Programming Perl, the cookbook is
more for examples of specific items, an excellent resource to be sure,
but not necessarily learning material. Recently I would suggest the
Llama's new soul mate,

http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/lrnperlorm/

It will take you to the next level for sure. The old soul mate, which I
really enjoyed at the time seems to have lost some of its luster, at
least in that ORA seems to have replaced it with the above,

http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/advperl/

The two above overlap a good deal.

Having said that, the Camel is indispensable and should be on every Perl
programmers shelf. Naturally there is also Safari if you aren't into
being a zoo keeper like some of us (or don't have the funds)....

http://danconia.org

Wiggins> The two above overlap a good deal.

The Alpaca and the Panther overlap in that they cover some similar
ground. But the Alpaca is designed to be a step-by-step tutorial: in
fact, it's a transcript of the course we teach (both onsite and
open-enrollment) for people who have completed the Llama course and
want more. The Panther is closer to a reference book.

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +
<[Email Removed]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!

Well put, and I agree (naturally). I guess I hadn't thought about the
Panther as a reference, because at the time it acted as both for lack of
other resources, but the newer is definitely in the same vain as the
Learning style, and I definitely enjoyed its easy flow.

http://danconia.org

I worked through the LLama and used the Camel for some additional information at certain stages. Now I ordered the Alpaca but not the Panther since it seems a bit outdated (1997) to me.

I am looking forward to reading the second Learning book, since I really enjoyed Learning Perl. Thanks Randal!

- Jan
--
Either this man is dead or my watch has stopped. - Groucho Marx

you might want to go back and re-read
the perldoc on perlvar - yes it is the
default value - if that were a <FH> type
of operation. think about the problem like

my $boo = some_sub();
print "$boo is a ", ref($boo) , "n";

my $i=0;
while( some_sub($i++) )
{
last unless $_;
print "got $_ n";
}

print "ending $in";
#------------------------
#
sub some_sub
{
my $i = shift;
my @list = qw/a b c d/;

return ($i)? 0: @list ;

} # end of some_sub

in this case there is a function call in the while
loop that will return the array reference - but there
is the minor detail that it is NOT being assigned to $_
as is your assumption...

HTH.

ciao
drieux

---

....

We Unix people want to rip out the operating system
some times! I don't know what this post is even doing
in "[Email Removed]" - it's been enough to make my
head swim for a while.

For the record, test.pl < test.txt won't work - you
need:
perl test.pl < test.txt

Just when you think Perl on Windows is more or less
normal, you get something like this thrown at you...

Peter


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus

I started off with the emacs version originally put out by MIT in
the 80s. Loved it. Then came along gnuemacs, gemacs, xemacs, etc.
All great improvements.

Simply stated, running 'vi' from the command line (ie, start-up) is
faster than *emacs. BUT, a TRUE emacs-person would rarely exit
from it and run everything within it's extensive environment.

To be honest? I can't remember half of the commands in emacs. But
as stated, it is simply faster for most day-to-day tasts.

JW


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus

We can receive only plain text on this group: coloured highlighting
doesn't work. You must mark your program in a different way.

The fetchrow_array method returns a list of data. In the first part of the 'if'
statement you're throwing that list away - nothing's being assigned to $_. In the
second part you're copying the list into array @row, so it should work fine.

Dereferencing $_ as an array with @$_ will work only if $_ holds an array
reference. You could rewrite the first loop as

while ($_ = $sel->fetchrow_arrayref) {
print OUTPUT '"';
print OUTPUT join '","', map {$_||0} @$_;
print OUTPUT '"',"n";
}

which will work because the fetchrow_arrayref method returns an array reference
and it's being stored in $_. Using $_ is only useful if there are several
operations to be done on the value that can take $_ as a default parameter. In
this case you have no such operations and you would be better off writing

while (my $row = $sel->fetchrow_arrayref) {
print OUTPUT '"';
print OUTPUT join '","', map {$_||0} @$row;
print OUTPUT '"',"n";
}

HTH,

Rob

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus

Yes, and since Emacs is built on top of a LISP interpreter you can
customize it till your hearts content -- including changing the regular
expressions emacs matches files with in Dired mode.

I'd like to add that emacs allows a "Server Mode". So you start it up
once every time you boot, it runs nicely in the background, and whenever
you need to edit a file you use emacs in client mode (i.e. type
emacsclient instead of emacs).

I spent a lot of time learning both Vi and Emacs when I first came to
the *nix world. Both sides had some very smart people with very good
arguments as to why one was better then the other. So I figured the
best way to figure out which one was best for me was to spend a couple
hours mucking around with each one.

I ended up choosing Emacs because, despite the learning curve, it's a
damned good IDE. In emacs I can view packages, methods, and a bunch of
other code related things in the speedbar, and I have found I code much
faster in Emacs then vi (by over a thousand lines a day).

Most of it boils down to the fact that 30% of code tends to be
reusable. For instance, take the following:

my $query = qq+SELECT * FROM foo WHERE bar = "baz"+;
my $result = $DBI_connection->prepare($query)
or die("Can't prepare $query because $!");
$result->execute
or die("Can't execute $query because $!");

I've created an Emacs macro that will allow me to type three keys,
and everything with the exception of the contents of the query are
created. Then I fill in the query and hit alt } and I'm at the next
point in my code. It's much quicker then I ever could have done under
vi.

Throw into that abbreviation mode (you can define "abbreviations", so
type the abbreviation and have it automatically expand, i.e. every time
I type b@p [Email Removed] might be automatically replaced). This,
again, increases my efficiency because I can fly through code and many
common mistakes are automatically corrected.

Now, vi may have support for some of the features I've listed above.
(For instance Vi does have macros, but it's not built atop a programming
language like LISP so I'd assume they're not that powerful...But that's
conjecture). But the point is that ***I*** liked emacs better, so I use
emacs. Because it's more efficient for ***me***. It may be that for
***you*** Ed, or another editor may be a better choice.

I encourage everyone to try out all the alternatives out there to make
up his or her own mind,

-Dan

Yes, and since Emacs is built on top of a LISP interpreter you can
customize it till your hearts content -- including changing the regular
expressions emacs matches files with in Dired mode.

I'd like to add that emacs allows a "Server Mode". So you start it up
once every time you boot, it runs nicely in the background, and whenever
you need to edit a file you use emacs in client mode (i.e. type
emacsclient instead of emacs).

I spent a lot of time learning both Vi and Emacs when I first came to
the *nix world. Both sides had some very smart people with very good
arguments as to why one was better then the other. So I figured the
best way to figure out which one was best for me was to spend a couple
hours mucking around with each one.

I ended up choosing Emacs because, despite the learning curve, it's a
damned good IDE. In emacs I can view packages, methods, and a bunch of
other code related things in the speedbar, and I have found I code much
faster in Emacs then vi (by over a thousand lines a day).

Most of it boils down to the fact that 30% of code tends to be
reusable. For instance, take the following:

my $query = qq+SELECT * FROM foo WHERE bar = "baz"+;
my $result = $DBI_connection->prepare($query)
or die("Can't prepare $query because $!");
$result->execute
or die("Can't execute $query because $!");

I've created an Emacs macro that will allow me to type three keys,
and everything with the exception of the contents of the query are
created. Then I fill in the query and hit alt } and I'm at the next
point in my code. It's much quicker then I ever could have done under
vi.

Throw into that abbreviation mode (you can define "abbreviations", so
type the abbreviation and have it automatically expand, i.e. every time
I type b@p [Email Removed] might be automatically replaced). This,
again, increases my efficiency because I can fly through code and many
common mistakes are automatically corrected.

Now, vi may have support for some of the features I've listed above.
(For instance Vi does have macros, but it's not built atop a programming
language like LISP so I'd assume they're not that powerful...But that's
conjecture). But the point is that ***I*** liked emacs better, so I use
emacs. Because it's more efficient for ***me***. It may be that for
***you*** Ed, or another editor may be a better choice.

I encourage everyone to try out all the alternatives out there to make
up his or her own mind,

-Dan


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [Email Removed]
For additional commands, e-mail: [Email Removed]
<http://learn.perl.org/> <http://learn.perl.org/first-response>

are entries always separate by an empty line?

you don't need to load everything into an array or hash. you can read and
process one entry at a time. assuming the entries are separated by an empty
line, the following works well:

#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use strict;

$/ = "nn";

while(<DATA>){

s/n/:/g; s/:+$//;

print "$_n";
}

__DATA__
Date
Team Name 1
Team Name 2
Field1
Field2
FieldX

Date
Team Name 3
Team Name 4
Field 1
FieldX

__END__

prints:

Date:Team Name 1:Team Name 2:Field1:Field2:FieldX
Date:Team Name 3:Team Name 4:Field 1:FieldX

david
--
sub'_{print"@_ ";* = * __ , & }
sub'__{print"@_ ";* = * ___ , & }
sub'___{print"@_ ";* = * ____ , & }
sub'____{print"@_,n"}&{_+Just}(another)->(Perl)->(Hacker)

Hi Taylor.

If you set the input record separator - $/ - to a null string then it will
split the input file on one or more blank lines.

Take a look at the program below.

HTH,

Rob


#!perl
use strict;
use warnings;

local $/ = '';

while (<DATA>) {
my @data = split /n/;
print join(':', @data), "n";
}

__DATA__
Date
Team Name 1
Team Name 2
Field1
Field2
FieldX

Date
Team Name 3
Team Name 4
Field 1
FieldX

**OUTPUT

Date:Team Name 1:Team Name 2:Field1:Field2:FieldX
Date:Team Name 3:Team Name 4:Field 1:FieldX

TMTOWTDI :-)

#!/usr/bin/perl
use strict;
use warnings;

( $/, $ ) = ( '', "n" );
while ( <DATA> ) {
chomp;
tr/n/:/;
print;
}

__DATA__
Date
Team Name 1
Team Name 2
Field1
Field2
FieldX

Date
Team Name 3
Team Name 4
Field 1
FieldX



John
--
use Perl;
program
fulfillment

Yes, you have the file name in the wrong place. The syntax is "do
something to FILE | pipe data to second process | pipe data to third
process > redirect STDOUT to a file". What you have is "do something to
STDIN | pipe data to second process | pipe data to third process but use
FILE instead > redirect STDOUT to a file". You have to specify the file
name on the first process in the pipeline.


John
--
use Perl;
program
fulfillment

What is the "real" goal? Aka why are you shelling out to grep in the
first place? As a side note you should be using full paths for grep,
file1, file2, and you should be checking the return code of the command.
Also it seems silly to use backticks if you are piping STDOUT to a file.

http://danconia.org

Is that what the ACTUAL line looks like?

Use perl to do it:

open my $in, '<', 'file1' or die "Cannot open file1: $!";
open my $out, '>', 'file2' or die "Cannot open file2: $!";
while ( <$in> ) {
next if /STUFF:STUFF/;
print $out;
}
close $out;
close $in;



John
--
use Perl;
program
fulfillment

John just provided a good one. Optionally if all you care about is
determining whether a line contains a string it might (I didn't
benchmark it) be faster to use 'index' instead of a regex:

perldoc -f index

My complaint is about the use of shelling out to handle something that
can be easily done programmatically within Perl itself, aka like John
showed using two opens and a simple while with the diamond operator (and
conveniently it has more error checking in it, should be faster, is more
secure, less error prone, and portable!). To me shelling out is a last
resort, or a quick fix (aka if you have to ask here it isn't quick enough).

http://danconia.org

open my $in, '<', 'file1' or die "Cannot open file1: $!";
open my $out, '>', 'file2' or die "Cannot open file2: $!";
while ( <$in> ) {
s/^ //;
print $out;
}
close $out;
close $in;



John
--
use Perl;
program
fulfillment

Rogue!

/R

I didn't remove the "n" character from the input line so it doesn't
have to be added to the output line and print() prints the contents of
$_ if nothing other than the filehandle is passed to it.

What EXACTLY is STUFF? It could contain regex meta-characters which
will cause it to fail. Maybe you should use index() instead (as Wiggins
suggested.)

No.



John
--
use Perl;
program
fulfillment

- People like to spend money for stuff for no goods reason.
- Are those on servers you work with? Those specific ones may use those for whatever reason.
- Some people I know paid to go to school for years to learn crap like asp so if they don't use it they look kind of silly.
- *nix systems come with perl installed and use perl for lots of stuff,
- Mis informed people
- Perl is run as .cgi a lot of times so you may not notice it's Perl like you would the other kinds.
- People look at something shiny and think it must be good. IE(PHP people use CSS to make the utput of their scripts look very sharp, so people assume it must be good, but PHP has so many issues (Don't even get me started or I'll never shut up ;p) I can't stand to use it and when forced to (customer wants PHPBB or something) it ALWAYS a chore to make it work right.
PHP people say "IT runs fast" well use mod_perl and Perl will be faster than PHP and still be way more flexable and usefull.) Same principle applies to most other kinds as well.

Perl is all I use backend and frontend, and I mange a dozens
of servers, networks, and services for variose
isp's and internet service companies Around the united states.

Perl can do about anythign you want,
(I haven't found one practical job I needed to do I couldn't do with Perl)

So the short answer is:

There is no good reason, if they knew what was good for them and
what could boost reliablity, productivity, etcc whiel decreasing costs, time, and resources.

HTH

DMuey

No, just whenever I cruise the net I'm always surprised to see scripts
ending in .asp or .jsp. I understand that some people prefer Java to
Perl, but I know there are a lot of people out there who like perl.
Which has made me wonder more then once if in a security through
obscurity approach sites pass perl scripts off as ASP, etc.

For instance, Ebay's servers are run by IBM (hence the big blue IBM logo
on their sites). But all the forms like through to files ending in
..dll. That doesn't make much sense to me, I would think IBM would run
AIX / *nix servers for Ebay.

Perhaps I should have better said, why isn't it used more on the web?

Yes, but ASP and JSP end scripts in .asp and .jsp respectively, which
makes me wonder why I don't see less JSP and ASP tags.

Thanks for all your comments,

-Dan

Maybe, I don't see why I'd want to make people think I'm using insecure
stuff when I'm really using the best, but maybe.

Yeah, Ebay's stuff is really screwy I think.

To combat this I try to use .pl or .plx as of late.
I also suggested before on this list that Perl developers focus on using CSS in their
web site output to make their pages *look* nicer.
(See my whole PHP rant earlier in the thread)
IE - Basically that if a PHP/ASP/JSP/Whatever page *looks* nicer most people don't realize
that PHP/ASP/JSP/Whatever have nothing to do with the way it looks, it's the HTML/CSS/XML
that it outputs that determines the nice looks, So they never realize Perl is more
flexible and powerful.

For instance I was talking to a gentleman who was showing me his new web server ($$$ for Winders and IIS) with his new sexxy web app he was looking forward to using, and he was proud because "He had connections that saved him 10% so he only paid $3000 for it". I was shocked so I looked at his site with him and got a list of it's "awesome features".

That night I did the same thing in Perl and used the html/css from his site for the looks and I showed him the next day and he about died because mine did everything his did, looked the same and it was free. The only differenece was now he had a sort of torn and bleeding feeling in his bottom

;p

Well just to throw people off. I've often contemplated throwing up a
world readable /scripts directory on my server so anyone scanning my box
would say, "ooooh, insecure IIS" and provide me with enough notice they
were trying to hack me then if, for instance, they said "He's using
Mandrake Linux, better hang around the mailing lists looking for the
latest vulnerability". Of course, there's really not too much of value
on my box besides Nethack bones files so I'm not too worried.

LOL...

-Dan

Good point, similar to my "better looking" argument but "better looking" market wise.
That's what we need to do, use shinier words, "Perl Secure Enterprise Edition - Leveraging the Power of Experience with Reliabilty ", that would be the latest Perl that always has 'use strict' and 'use warnings' running no matter what
the script has in it:
IE #/usr/bin/perl
print "hi";

Maybe a warning gets spit out if the file they are slurping is
over a certain size, also.
And You'd need to use shiny words for describeing it's features:
"Exponentially expand the ease and practicality of development, deployment,
and use with many powerful modules that help you get the job done faster, and more securely."
"Complies with industry standards and functionality."

You'd have to have a cli (running on our Perl S.E.E of course) for each platform that:
- lists/upgrades/installs modules
- upgrades to latest "Perl S.E.E." with one click/command

Have the binary be called perlSEE instead of perl or something.

Looks like we have a busy weekend ahead!

Maybe a website listing should be made/found??

A recent article on Perl.com covered this a little:

http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2004/01/09/survey.html

Read the "Programming in the Large" section.

James