Re: todo: readpipe(LIST) -- what does that mean?

On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 10:00:18PM -0600, Darin McBride wrote:
> a) The todo is backwards: it looks like qx is the function behind readpipe :-)  
> However, since I don't think we want to complicate qx to take a list (I think 
> that "qwx( some list here)" would be of limited use without interpolation, and 
> qw doesn't interpolate, so I expect it to get messy just from a UX 
> perspective), what this todo effectively means is that qx is now a subset of 
> readpipe.  So I'm thinking that a first foray here might be to just switch the 
> implementation around such that we have a "readpipe" op that is distinct from 
> qx, and then have qx call the readpipe op.  This should not affect any tests.

Er, qx// is already a subset of readpipe;
i.e. qx/foo/ is just short for readpipe qq/foo/, while readpipe can take a
general argument, such as readpipe foo(1);
They both resolve to the OP_BACKTICK op, implemented by Perl_pp_backtick().


-- 
The warp engines start playing up a bit, but seem to sort themselves out
after a while without any intervention from boy genius Wesley Crusher.
    -- Things That Never Happen in "Star Trek" #17

• todo: readpipe(LIST) -- what does that mean? by Darin McBride
• Re: todo: readpipe(LIST) -- what does that mean? by Dave Mitchell
• Re: todo: readpipe(LIST) -- what does that mean? by Darin McBride
• Re: todo: readpipe(LIST) -- what does that mean? by Dave Mitchell