(tye)Re: why don't filehandles have punctuation before their name?

Perhaps you didn't notice the addition of BEGIN, END, CHECK, DESTROY, and INIT, etc. (: In fact, I think you should name subroutines with mixed case and should avoid the bareword-as-filehandle syntax. The bareword-as-filehandle syntax caused lots of problem even way back in Perl4. It is nice to have an alternative to it in Perl5.

- tye (but my friends call me "Tye")

Comment on (tye)Re: why don't filehandles have punctuation before their name?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: (tye)Re: why don't filehandles have punctuation before their name? by sierrathedog04 (Hermit) on Apr 24, 2001 at 06:14 UTC
99 percent of the code I see posted here uses barewords as filehandles. Is there some other way to do it? How?	[reply]
Re (tilly) (???): why don't filehandles have punctuation before their name? by tilly (Archbishop) on Apr 24, 2001 at 06:47 UTC
RE (tilly) 1: Merging files gives a demonstration. In Perl 5.6 there is no need to load up Symbol and call gensym, the handle autovivifies.	[reply]


There's more than one way to do things
	PerlMonks