> 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/?
This is only one example. I'm not sure it's the best way. It's
definitely not the only way. Chaim asked:
> Or for that matter "file://u/frankeh/Projects" become? (I happen to
> live at a mount point /u.
You're missing an / under the example I showed. And extra / would
specify root explicitly.
But we're getting too tied up into details on this already. It's only
one of many many suggestions for portably dealing with filenames.
URI support has many advantages in its own right. For one thing, It
allows this:
$fo = open ">+ http://www.yahoo.com/";
print $fo $query_string;
$result = <$fo>;
To:
1. automatically fork http->open
2. create a POST on yahoo.com
3. read the results back from the POST
> 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.
Please read RFC's 14 and 101. Nothing is getting crammed into open.
Rather, open() is providing a portable mechanism for new file types and
methods to be easily accessed. Please read the RFC, it will help clear
this up. If you want to wait, v4 should be out tomorrow, which should be
even better.
-Nate
