> Yeah, good point. pipeopen maybe? (Though then that gets confused with > regular pipes) childproc? If it weren't so darned fundamental to the > languages we care about I'd just throw the thing into the standard library > and punt on it entirely...
It seems like an example of opcode bloat to me. Especially as it should be possible to implement this with a piping open, or an equivalent of IPC::Open3, and a handful of other opcodes. The whole thing would take fewer lines than this email. -R
