Re: sysopen vs. open

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: sysopen vs. open by bichonfrise74 (Vicar) on May 15, 2009 at 00:25 UTC
I'm not very familiar with C. So, I have to ask... in which situation is open better than sysopen or vice-versa?	[reply]
Re^3: sysopen vs. open by tilly (Archbishop) on May 15, 2009 at 00:49 UTC
At a command prompt type `perldoc -f sysopen` and `perldoc -f open`. Or compare them on http://perldoc.perl.org/index-functions.html. My summary is that sysopen is a lower-level interface that can't ever be removed because of backwards compatibility, while open is the one that I would suggest people use.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^2: sysopen vs. open by ikegami (Patriarch) on Apr 18, 2020 at 09:27 UTC
Not so. Both create buffered handles like `fopen(3)`, not mere file descriptors like `open(2)` The difference is the args you can pass to them.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^2: sysopen vs. open by JavaFan (Canon) on May 15, 2009 at 22:01 UTC
That's not complete. Perl's `open` is equivalent to the union of C's `fopen` and `popen`.	[reply]