On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Juerd wrote:
open '', $foo;
open '', $foo;
is much harder to read than
open 'r', $foo;
open 'w', $foo;
Are you sure?!? I would tend to disagree... not that MHO is particularly
important, I guess, but just to stress the fact that it is by large a
Larry Wall wrote:
I suppose another approach is simply to declare that dot is always a
metacharacter in double quotes, and you have to use \. for a literal
dot, just as in regexen. That approach would let us interpolate
things like .foo without a variable on the left. That could cause
a great
On Thursday 15 July 2004 19:42, Michele Dondi wrote:
open '', $foo;
open '', $foo;
is much harder to read than
open 'r', $foo;
open 'w', $foo;
Are you sure?!? I would tend to disagree... not that MHO is particularly
important, I guess, but just to stress the fact
On Thu 15 Jul 2004 11:42, Michele Dondi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Juerd wrote:
open '', $foo;
open '', $foo;
is much harder to read than
open 'r', $foo;
open 'w', $foo;
Are you sure?!? I would tend to disagree...
So do I. , and are
H.Merijn Brand skribis 2004-07-15 11:57 (+0200):
1. They do not ambiguate with files named 'r', or 'w'
Not a problem, assuming that these are named arguments as in:
open :r, $file;
open :w, $file;
open :rw, $file;
open :r :w, $file; # Hmm...
2. They don't have to be
On Wednesday 14 July 2004 12:58 pm, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
Andrew Rodland wrote:
So if we have @x = [1, 3, 5, 6 .. 9, 10 .. Inf, 42];
...
42 is just one number, so questions of indexing
it are moot, but its distance from the left is Inf. So, there's no way
to access the 42 by
Greg Boug writes:
I have always felt that keeping ['' and ''] the same as shell
scripting was a handy thing, ...
Using C:w and C:r would at least match what C:w and C:r do in
'Vi' ...
Smylers
--- Smylers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Using C:w and C:r would at least match what C:w and C:r do in
'Vi' ...
That seems intuitive:
my $fh = open 'foo.txt', :w;
$fh.say Hello, world!;
$fh = open 'foo.txt', :e;# Ha, ha, just kidding!
$fh.say -EOF
If wifey shuns
Your fond
Greg Boug wrote:
I have always felt that keeping it the same as shell scripting was a handy
thing, especially when I have been teaching it to others. It also makes
the ol' perl5
open FH, |/usr/bin/foo;
make a lot more sense. Using something like
open p, /usr/bin/foo;
just
Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon skribis 2004-07-15 13:04 (-0700):
$in=open :r |/usr/bin/foo;
$out=open :w |/usr/bin/foo;
$both=open :rw |/usr/bin/foo;
No, thank you. Please let us not repeat the mistake of putting mode and filename/path
in one argument.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/tmp/example$
Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon writes:
My personal preference is for:
$in=open :r |/usr/bin/foo;
The pipe would be legal on either side of the string. This would
still allow the often-useful type a pipe command at a prompt for a
file,
And it still allows for all those security holes in
11 matches
Mail list logo
