I find fixing the documentation to add "< " to the "Perl-like pseudo code" to be a miniscule fix compared to the major revamping of most of the mentions of <>, -n, and -p including many examples to make them correct. And this, of course, puts the lie to "the current behavior is as it was intended" and "the current behavior is documented". But I've said that so many times already just in this thread that I'm clearly not saying it now because I think you'll "get" it any better than the previous times. :)

And "perl -p... *" causing "rm -rf .."? Who would ever consider that something to be "fixed"? That was clearly what was wanted all along!