Howdy, moritz++ has a point. Can we deprecate the "open" opcode and tell people to use the "open" method on either File or FileHandle PMC? The downside is that we have to wait quite a while, due to the deprecation cycle, for this to come into effect.
Would it be possible to make the open opcode use the File or FileHandle PMC behind the scenes? That would fix my problem and not require changing anything to end users as well as avoiding the deprecation cycle. Duke On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Moritz Lenz <[email protected]> wrote: > Jonathan Leto wrote: >> Would making the open opcode a dynop create a noticeable decrease in >> performance? That is the only reason I can see that we would not want >> to go that route. > > As I mentioned on #parrot, it's not clear to me why 'open' needs to be > an opcode (or a dynop, for that matter) at all. It sounds like the thing > you'd find as a method call in a (core) library, really. > > So deprecating 'open' as an opcode (and replacing it by an appropriate > library function, if that doesn't exist already) seems to solve that > problem :-) > > Cheers, > Moritz > _______________________________________________ > http://lists.parrot.org/mailman/listinfo/parrot-dev > -- Jonathan "Duke" Leto [email protected] http://leto.net _______________________________________________ http://lists.parrot.org/mailman/listinfo/parrot-dev
