I know. It's in the Perl script named perlbug, not in the man page perldoc perlbug. I already acknowledged this.

If one posts a very laconic response to another post on PerlMonks, especially a non sequitur, one is more apt to cause needless confusion than to make a helpful point. To me, the instruction to "See perlbug" meant to type perldoc perlbug at the command prompt, which is what I did. I was confused by what I'd been told to do.

Nobody asked you to type perldoc perlbug I don't know why you jumped to this conclusion. The parent of your post I responded to clearly provided a hyperlink and a line number, clicking that rather than typing something else would have negated any outstanding confusion.

And in the parent of this node Re^6: Open txt file using default program on Windows he already clearly showed that it's a misunderstanding.

No need to defend BUKs bad temper. =)

Cheers Rolf

( addicted to the Perl Programming Language)

To me, the instruction to "See perlbug" meant to type perldoc perlbug at the command prompt,

If perlbug contained no pod, would you have taken "See perlbug" to mean "see nothing"?

I said "See perlbug" with no qualification. You introduced perldoc -- a utility for which I have neither time nor use --- into the equation.

---

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.