Re^2: (Some) inconsistencies with IO built-ins, their documentation and filehandle names ("symbolic references")

Thank you for answers, ikegami and LanX, I understand the situation is pre-history heritage. Just curious, how it came that only open, opendir, print, printf actively object against "symbolic references" under use strict, in these Modern Perl times :). Even if it's too low priority to fix code, maybe stream-lining documentation would be not too much work -- now, where it's clearly stated strings are OK as indirection mechanism, the tone seems neutral or passively-encouraging :). Otherwise, to add to confusion, some built-ins (-X, etc.) accept both filehandles and strings (scalars/expressions), but here strings are filenames. Further curiosity, why all other /.*dir/ built-ins didn't possess indirection ability, in pre-history.

Comment on Re^2: (Some) inconsistencies with IO built-ins, their documentation and filehandle names ("symbolic references") Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: (Some) inconsistencies with IO built-ins, their documentation and filehandle names ("symbolic references") by LanX (Saint) on Jun 10, 2020 at 09:54 UTC
I can't tell much about implementation or API, cause it's very complicated. You might want to discuss this on P5P. Otherwise ... in order to have deeper insight and better feedback here, could you please provide a list of hands on examples of what you see and what you want? > Even if it's too low priority to fix code, maybe stream-lining documentation would be not too much work Well I think you are always welcome to provide patches to perldoc. Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery}	[reply]
Re^4: (Some) inconsistencies with IO built-ins, their documentation and filehandle names ("symbolic references") by syphilis (Archbishop) on Jun 10, 2020 at 12:24 UTC
You might want to discuss this on P5P Could you elaborate on that ? To me, "P5P" means the perl5-porters mailing list, but having been subscribed there for a number of years, I can report that virtually nothing of any significance now happens there. Every now and then, Steve Hay or SawyerX will announce a new stable release of perl, or someone will announce a new release of bleadperl, or Tony Cooke or David Mitchell will report on what they've been doing (and someone will probably respond by thanking them for doing what they're being paid to do). Or someone might come up with some rubbish half-arsed idea. But, IME, that list is currently the last place you want to go if you wish to initiate some sort of meaningful conversation. Cheers, Rob	[reply]
Re^5: (Some) inconsistencies with IO built-ins, their documentation and filehandle names ("symbolic references") by LanX (Saint) on Jun 10, 2020 at 12:34 UTC
> To me, "P5P" means the perl5-porters mailing list, Correct > but having been subscribed there for a number of years, I have to admit me not, I always had problems understanding the discussions. > I can report that virtually nothing of any significance now happens there. That's sad, I was recently adviced to probably ask there to move the debugger into its own repository, so I assumed it's alive. My point was that vr's description is too abstract to be efficiently discussed here and might need a more specialized audience. A set of examples per command or even better test cases would be needed to have a productive discussion here. ° > Could you elaborate on that ? Clearer now? Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery} °) e.g. compare this approach Re^5: foreach $1 -- all special variables	[reply]


Don't ask to ask, just ask
	PerlMonks