On Fri 30 Aug 2002 11:02, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 10:30:22AM +0200, H.Merijn Brand wrote: > > I was thinking about highjacking a standard function: read () > > Giving read() semantics completely unrelated to reading a filehandle would > be a bad choice of syntax. So would making it a keyword. Could you do it > (mostly) via XS?
Probably, but I was thinking here about undocumented features. You know, from the good ol' days: the real ordonary hacking To be honoust I see no immediate real usage for making this available to the world. I was just brainstorming with myself about how to trigger runaway memory from smoke to smoke I first thought about an environment variable that, once detected on exit of perl would show the memory use, but that is neither extensible, nor elegant, and I thought of the read hack. Then my mind wandered and musings about how destructive/obfuscated/useful a similar hack to 'write' could be :) Anyway, back to the real world. Feet on solid ground. What did you think of the speed comparison model of the smoke output? -- H.Merijn Brand Amsterdam Perl Mongers (http://amsterdam.pm.org/) using perl-5.6.1, 5.8.0 & 633 on HP-UX 10.20 & 11.00, AIX 4.2, AIX 4.3, WinNT 4, Win2K pro & WinCE 2.11. Smoking perl CORE: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] send smoke reports to: [EMAIL PROTECTED], QA: http://qa.perl.org
