Re: [PATCH] readline() with no FILEHANDLE

On 2002.02.22 21:40 Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
> This looks like the right thing to me (but makes t/op/flip fail test 10).
> 
> --- opcode.pl.orig	Mon Feb 11 16:25:16 2002
> +++ opcode.pl	Thu Feb 21 17:53:54 2002
> @@ -480,7 +480,7 @@
>  backtick	quoted execution (``, qx)	ck_open		t%	
>  # glob defaults its first arg to $_
>  glob		glob			ck_glob		t@	S?
> -readline	<HANDLE>		ck_null		t%	F?
> +readline	<HANDLE>		ck_fun		t%	F
>  rcatline	append I/O operator	ck_null		t$
>  
>  # Bindable operators.
> End of Patch.

Excuse me, but, naively, why don't make readline(*FH) and
readline(FH) work like <FH> in all cases (and readline() like
<>) ?

• [PATCH] readline() with no FILEHANDLE by sthoenna
• Re: [PATCH] readline() with no FILEHANDLE by sthoenna
• Re: [PATCH] readline() with no FILEHANDLE by Rafael Garcia-Suarez
• Re: [PATCH] readline() with no FILEHANDLE by Rafael Garcia-Suarez
• [Related issues?] [PATCH] readline() with no FILEHANDLE, [ID 20020222.011] by Anton Tagunov
• Re: [Related issues?] [PATCH] readline() with no FILEHANDLE, [ID 20020222.011] by sthoenna
• Re[2]: Related issues? [ID 20020222.011] by Anton Tagunov
• Re: Re[2]: Related issues? [ID 20020222.011] by sthoenna
• Re[4]: Related issues? [ID 20020222.011] by Anton Tagunov
• Re: Re[4]: Related issues? [ID 20020222.011] by sthoenna
• Re[6]: Related issues? [ID 20020222.011] by Anton Tagunov
• Re[7]: Related issues? [ID 20020222.011] -- sorry by Anton Tagunov
• Re: [PATCH] readline() with no FILEHANDLE by sthoenna
• Re: [PATCH] readline() with no FILEHANDLE by Rafael Garcia-Suarez