Ideally, those methods/subroutines/functions, i.e. foohelper() should be declared and defined inside the method/sub/function they're helping, i.e. foo():

function foo(input):
function preprocess(input):
...
end function function process(input): ... end function intermediary = preprocess(input) result = process(intermediary) return result end function

There are two kinds of helper functions, those that serve only one function and those that are useful in general (which can also become a problem) - and if your helper function is only useful in one scope, it should only be defined in that scope.

I'd rather say proving a theory incorrect is just as valuable as proving a *hypothesis* correct. If it's a hypothesis, it's no fun proving it wrong (it wasn't established anyway, it might go against your intuition but nobody cares), and if it's a theory, it's no fun proving it right (what are you talking about, of course it's right, we already knew that).

I would elaborate on this but that would just be filler.

Huh... you can do that?

To think that I'd been using cat all this time...

Sweet, that's like, 370 euro!

No, wait, I forgot, that's not how you convert currency in this business.

I'm only speculating here, it's not really even an educated guess, but I'm scarred from seeing the US dollar depreciating like that and European as well as American prices in the Apple stores staying constant.

0744 = owner read exec, group and world read only (or in ls -l format: dr-xr--r--). Read permissions won't do you any good, you need executable to access files within and list directory contents, so it'll be chmod 0755 instead.

$ mkdir test
$ echo test > test/test
$ chmod 0744 test
$ sudo chown nobody test
$ cat test/test
test/test: Access denied
$ sudo chmod 0755 test
$ cat test/test
test

(Actually, read permissions are meaningless for directories so far I know, so 0755 is equivalent to 0311 for directories.)

Preferably, set up a logging group or similar, create a user for the provider in the logging group and make the directory 0750.

In the sense that VLMC can read anything and subsequently write something, yes, probably. I very much doubt the number of output formats will match the number of input formats, though.

I always thought Windows Movie Maker was good for video stitching, the problem was it could only output to a WMV, which is understandable (msft and all that).

As previously discussed, they are working on that. It's not a complete, one-click solution yet, but for instance since releasing it they've added the possibility to export all Google Docs documents to a single archive - previously it was per-document only.