>>>>> "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 -- 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
