Re: sysopen vs. open

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: sysopen vs. open by Anonymous Monk on May 15, 2009 at 07:48 UTC
...from reading man pages you only learn, but you don't get XP :)	[reply]
Re^3: sysopen vs. open by bichonfrise74 (Vicar) on May 15, 2009 at 21:11 UTC
I'm not here to get XP, but for the learning. There's no point in earning XP if I'm not learning, what will I do with it? :)	[reply]
Re^2: sysopen vs. open by bichonfrise74 (Vicar) on May 15, 2009 at 21:07 UTC
I did read the perlopentut and man pages for open and sysopen. And as jwkrahn mentioned, sysopen is equivalent to C's open, but I'm still not sure what situation is open better than sysopen.	[reply]
Re^3: sysopen vs. open by JavaFan (Canon) on May 15, 2009 at 21:56 UTC
That depends on your definition of better. Some people consider less typing for common situation to be better. Further more, there are things that can be done with `open` that cannot be done with `sysopen`. And there things that can be done with `sysopen` that cannot be done with `open`.	[reply]
Re^2: sysopen vs. open by coyocanid (Sexton) on Apr 17, 2020 at 02:09 UTC
Interestingly, none of those talk about the return values for sysopen. I'm going to guess that a falsey value is a fail.	[reply]
Re^3: sysopen vs. open by soonix (Chancellor) on Apr 17, 2020 at 06:32 UTC
obviously, rou read different documentation than I. All three (open, sysopen and perlopentut) explicitly say that `undef` is returned on failure, which is, as you 'guessed', a falsey value. Edit: added the words in italics	[reply] [d/l]