Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from July 2014
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 05:54:24PM -0400, Ricardo Signes wrote:
> * Rafael Garcia-Suarez <rgs@consttype.org> [2014-07-24T11:51:40]
> > I believe that this was discussed here some years ago, and that this
> > was suggested by TomC. Anyway, I pushed a patch on rgs/nomagicopen.
> > The patch is incomplete as it lacks docs and tests. I welcome feedback
> > on the intent of the feature.
>
> I'm still not crazy about the one-off syntax addition, but I think that it's
> the best we're going to see without setting an unrealistic bar for a new,
> generic feature. If we ever *do* get <> adverbs, we can call this sugar for
> one or blah blah blah it doesn't matter that much right now. :-)
>
> While my heart wants -n to be safe, my conscience tells me that we'll break
> enough (bizarre, to my mind (except maybe regarding "-")) expectations that it
> isn't worth doing. Probably we want -P and -N for safe opening.
>
> I am gratified to see that <<X>> fails for any X, as you've only made the
> literal construct <<>> iterate. Awesome. I think we're going to want a better
> error message, if possible, though, than:
>
> ~/code/perl5$ ./perl -e 'while (<<ARGV>>) { print }' 'ls |'
> Can't find string terminator "ARGV" anywhere before EOF at -e line 1.
>
> Something roughly like "safe <<>> operator meaningless on concrete filehandles"
That may be hard, as this:
while (<<ARGV>>3) {print}
ARGV
is legal syntax.
You'd need to look ahead a couple of tokens to determine whether '<<ARGV>>'
is reading from a filehandle, or shifting a here doc.
Abigail
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next