Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from September 2016
* Dave Mitchell <davem@iabyn.com> [2016-09-27 17:12]:
> The determination of what is a perl executable and what is an arg
> seems a bit haphazard. It seems to be: if it starts with a dash,
> assume its an arg, else try and execute it, and if it doesn't execute
> ok, assume its an arg? I don't like this at all. I'd much prefer it to
> be deterministic based on the command line's syntax, although I'm not
> sure what syntax. Perhaps args to perl should be part of the same arg
> as the executable name, e.g.
>
> Porting/bench.pl \
> 'perlA+foo -perlA_arg1 -perlA_arg2' \
> 'perlB+bar -perlB_arg1 -perlB_arg2'
>
> although I guess that could run afoul of executable pathnames with spaces
> in them.
Seems obvious enough to me… how about this?
First, of all, benchmarking 3 perls, with no args possible, has
a shorthand that works just like before:
Porting/bench.pl perlA perlB perlC
Then, if you need args, add --cmd to say so, and separate the command
lines with :: (as used by prove to pass args to test scripts):
Porting/bench.pl \
--cmd perlA -perlA_arg1 -perlA_arg2 \
:: perlB -perlB_arg1 -perlB_arg2
So the initial shorthand example can also be written longhand as
Porting/bench.pl --cmd perlA :: perlB :: perlC
Does that work for you?
Regards,
--
Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next