It just shows that conflating "perldoc %s" with "perldoc -f %s" in "[doc://%s]" and depend on some magic list to separate the function names from the module names is a bad idea, in my opinion.

For example: is [doc://open] short for open or for open? Both pages exist.

This should have been two separate link types from the start.

But: the damage is done. For backward compatibility the behavior of [doc://] will have to remain as is. Perhaps we could add 2, not 1, new link type? I propose "docf" (or "func") for functions, and "docm" for modules ([mod://] is taken and links to search.cpan.org)

In reply to Re: Broken shortcut links for some built-in functions by bart
in thread Broken shortcut links for some built-in functions by toolic

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.