$file.IO.slurp and slurp($file) are basically the same.
$handle.slurp-rest does *not* close the handle, as another process might still
be writing to it, so you could do another .slurp-rest.
To get back to your original code:
get '/atom' => sub {
my $path = $.meta ~ request.path;
return open($path).slurp-rest;
}
I would write that as:
get '/atom' => sub { slurp $.meta ~ request.path }
Should you wind up with an opened handle, could could use a LEAVE phaser to
make sure the handle gets closed:
get '/atom' => sub {
LEAVE $.meta.handle.close;
return $.meta.handle.slurp-rest;
}
HTH,
Liz
=====================
> On 25 Mar 2017, at 17:12, Gabor Szabo <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Oh so you say that's indeed a bug in my code. That's a relief. Thanks!
>
>
> As I can see I had some $file.IO.slurp and some of the slurp-rest ones.
>
> What is the difference between $file.IO.slurp and slurp($file) ?
> Is the latter just an alias for the former?
>
> Gabor
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Timo Paulssen <[email protected]> wrote:
>> i highly suggest you slurp instead of open + slurp-rest, because that
>> will automatically close the file for you, too.
>>
>> other than that, you can pass :close to the slurp-rest method and it'll
>> also close the file.
>>
>> if you're not closing the files you're opening, you'll be relying on the
>> garbage collector to do file handle closing for you, which is
>> nondeterministic and a bad idea in general.
>>
>> HTH
>> - Timo
