On Tue, 15 Aug 2000, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> With URI support, you still have to contort a little, but not as much.
> Here's some better examples from an email I sent earlier:
>
> $fo = open "file://c/docs/personal";
>
> # Unix = /docs/personal # here, 'c' becomes '/'
> # Mac = :docs:personal # here, 'c' becomes ':'
> # Win = c:\docs\personal
Really? I would have expected that to be "/c/docs/personal" under
UNIX. Strangely enough Netscape on my Linux box thought I wanted to
contact a server called "c". Lynx thought I wanted to contact an FTP
server.
So, what's so portable about file:// URLs again? How do they magically
know that //c/ means / on UNIX? What do they do with //z/?
> Although the examples are terrible at showing it (sorry), full URI
> support means more that just writing portable filenames. It means having
> Perl understand http://, ftp://, etc, etc, so that it can do something
> "really cool" with it. The upcoming v4 of RFC 14 will show how this is
> an advantage.
Have you ever used LWP? It's already "really cool". Should we package it
with Perl6? Sure! Should we try to cram its many protocols into open?
I'm not so sure.
-sam
