>>>>> "JL" == Jonathan Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

  JL> Well, I did suggest that "openfile" and "opendir" exist alongside
  JL> "open", with "openfile" being more akin to Perl 5's "open" or
  JL> "sysopen", and "open" being a bit more dwimmy.

  JL> But in general, most of the differences that you mention are things
  JL> that ought to be addressed in the resulting iterators, not in the
  JL> creating statement.  No, a "directory handle" will not behave exactly
  JL> like a "file handle".  But then, a file handle doesn't behave exactly
  JL> like "standard in" or "standard out", either (last I checked, Perl 5
  JL> won't do anything useful if you say "seek STDIN, 0, SEEK_END").

well, that seek failure is a result of the stream nature of stdin and
not a failure of perl. remember that open and much of the i/o layers
(regardless of perl I/O's rewrite) are just wrappers around the OS and
libc calls. i don't see how to dwim them all together (but IO::All does
that in a wacky dwim way). i have never felt the need for super smart
iterators so i can change looping over lines to looping over a
dir. maybe you might have a set of filenames in file vs a dir of
names. but i just don't run into that need. sometimes mappings like that
are just overkill IMO.

enough from me on this. as with the rest of p6 i will work with whatever
is decided by @larry.


Uri Guttman  ------  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  -------- http://www.stemsystems.com
--Perl Consulting, Stem Development, Systems Architecture, Design and Coding-
Search or Offer Perl Jobs  ----------------------------  http://jobs.perl.org

Reply via email to