Re^6: greater efficiency required (ls, glob, or readdir?)

Oh, if you don't like the died message, replace it with

   exit 1 if $?;
[download]

A few character strokes more, but still a very short line.

And no, the program won't be silent. "cat" is perfectly able to tell the user why it can't read the file.

Comment on Re^6: greater efficiency required (ls, glob, or readdir?) Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^7: greater efficiency required (ls, glob, or readdir?) by ikegami (Patriarch) on Aug 27, 2008 at 21:01 UTC
True, I overlooked `cat`'s error message. It'll still be silent for spawning errors, although those will be far less common.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^8: greater efficiency required (ls, glob, or readdir?) by JavaFan (Canon) on Aug 27, 2008 at 21:09 UTC
I'm not sure what you mean by "spawning errors", but if 'cat' happens to be chasing mice outside my $PATH, Perl will tell me: $ PATH=/tmp /usr/bin/perl -wE '$_ = `cat /etc/motd`' Can't exec "cat": No such file or directory at -e line 1. [download]	[reply] [d/l]
Re^9: greater efficiency required (ls, glob, or readdir?) by ikegami (Patriarch) on Aug 27, 2008 at 21:37 UTC
Remember, the file name is a variable in this discussion, so you're method of calling `cat` is unacceptable. First fix the major bug that your script treats file names as shell commands, then you'll notice it's silent. Update: eh? It's suppose to be. Since when does `open` output error messages on its own! `$ PATH=/tmp /usr/bin/perl -we 'open my $fh, "-\|", "cat", "/etc/motd"' Can't exec "cat": No such file or directory at -e line 1.` [download]	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^10: greater efficiency required (ls, glob, or readdir?) by JavaFan (Canon) on Aug 27, 2008 at 21:42 UTC