On Thu 15 Jul 2004 11:42, Michele Dondi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Juerd wrote: > > > open '<', $foo; > > open '>', $foo; > > > > is much harder to read than > > > > open 'r', $foo; > > open 'w', $foo; > > Are you sure?!? I would tend to disagree...
So do I. "<", and ">" are imho MUCH clearer than 'r' and 'w' for several reasons 0. More appealing to the eye 1. They do not ambiguate with files named 'r', or 'w' 2. They don't have to be translated (in german that would be 'l' and 's') 3. They play nice with possible extensions 'open ">:utf8", $file; > not that MHO is particularly > important, I guess, but just to stress the fact that it is by large a > subjective matter... -- H.Merijn Brand Amsterdam Perl Mongers (http://amsterdam.pm.org/) using perl-5.6.1, 5.8.3, & 5.9.x, and 809 on HP-UX 10.20 & 11.00, 11i, AIX 4.3, SuSE 9.0, and Win2k. http://www.cmve.net/~merijn/ http://archives.develooper.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] send smoke reports to: [EMAIL PROTECTED], QA: http://qa.perl.org
