Will this incarnation of open() be able to deal
with bi directional process communication?
The straightforward way to do that is quite simply:
open(FH, "|foocmd thisfoo thatfoo|")
or for shell avoidance:
open(FH, "|-|", "foocmd", "thisfoo", "thatfoo"))
--tom
Gregory S Hayes wrote:
but it would look much nicer in the framework of this version of open(),
perhaps something like ...
($readme, $writeme) = open doublehandle "/path/program -args";
print $writeme "here's your input\n";
$output = $readme;
$writeme-close;
$readme-close;
Thoughts?
Has anyone read RFC #11,112,006,825,558,016?
It's rather difficult to keep up with them all, or read them all
retroactively when you miss a few days. It's also hard to grep
them (HTML is the root of all evil). Is there an rsync server that
will dole out the pods for us as needed?
--tom
At 01:52 PM 9/6/00 -0600, Tom Christiansen wrote:
Has anyone read RFC #11,112,006,825,558,016?
It's rather difficult to keep up with them all, or read them all
retroactively when you miss a few days. It's also hard to grep
them (HTML is the root of all evil).
No HTML here:
$ telnet
Tom Christiansen wrote:
The straightforward way to do that is quite simply:
open(FH, "|foocmd thisfoo thatfoo|")
or for shell avoidance:
open(FH, "|-|", "foocmd", "thisfoo", "thatfoo"))
Does this work now Or are you just suggesting this be added to Perl
6?
Quoth
Tom Christiansen wrote:
The straightforward way to do that is quite simply:
open(FH, "|foocmd thisfoo thatfoo|")
or for shell avoidance:
open(FH, "|-|", "foocmd", "thisfoo", "thatfoo"))
Does this work now
Not quite. Nearly, though.
Or are you just suggesting this be
Today around 1:52pm, Tom Christiansen hammered out this masterpiece:
: Has anyone read RFC #11,112,006,825,558,016?
:
: It's rather difficult to keep up with them all, or read them all
: retroactively when you miss a few days. It's also hard to grep
: them (HTML is the root of all evil). Is
Buddha Buck wrote:
What advantage does this give
None whatsoever. I should have selected a less contentious
example that file handles to demonstrate my opinion that
tagged barewords should be allowed to do anything, not in exclusion
of, but in addition to, the syntactically tagged
Buddha Buck wrote:
my filehandle fh; fh-new("/tmp/appendablelog");
Ugh... How about...
my filehandle fh;
fh-open("/tmp/appendablelog");
Has anyone read RFC 14?
$FILE = open "/etc/motd";
@doc = $FILE;
$WEB = open http "http://www.yahoo.com";
@html = $WEB;
The
David L. Nicol wrote:
How about ALLOWING bareword everything-else? Start having
filehandles work the way everyone expects them to at first,
passing as arguments and so forth, without any special treatment?
How about barewords are always interpreted as function names (by default);
and the
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Eliminate bareword filehandles.
"Eliminate" is such a strong word. You're saying that we can't
use STDIN, STDOUT, STDERR, ARGV, or DATA anymore? Heck, some people
still use stdin and stdout! :-)
=head1
Tom Christiansen wrote:
Eliminate bareword filehandles.
"Eliminate" is such a strong word. You're saying that we can't
use STDIN, STDOUT, STDERR, ARGV, or DATA anymore? Heck, some people
still use stdin and stdout! :-)
Disclaimer: I am not attempting to put words in anyone's mouth.
Tom Christiansen wrote:
Eliminate bareword filehandles.
"Eliminate" is such a strong word. You're saying that we can't
use STDIN, STDOUT, STDERR, ARGV, or DATA anymore? Heck, some people
still use stdin and stdout! :-)
Disclaimer: I am not attempting to put words in anyone's mouth.
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 18:17:46 -0600, Tom Christiansen wrote:
You could pass it as
p(*FH);
instead, and the function's definition doesn't change.
Typeglobs are on the endangered species list. That is part of the reason
for this RFC.
sub getfh {
return open(my $fh, "+
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 19:06:24 -0600, Tom Christiansen wrote:
I feel that this ought to have worked, i.e. that the scope of the
lexical kicked in in the middle of the expression, at the transition
over the shortcut operator "".
Except that then you can't say
local $x = $x;
or
my $x = $x;
How about ALLOWING bareword everything-else? Start having
filehandles work the way everyone expects them to at first,
passing as arguments and so forth, without any special treatment?
--
David Nicol 816.235.1187 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subroutine one-arg, him
How about ALLOWING bareword everything-else? Start having
filehandles work the way everyone expects them to at first,
passing as arguments and so forth, without any special treatment?
One could do that, too. Or allow scoped declarations of
unadorned identifiers: this might be the road out of
17 matches
Mail list logo
