>>>>> "AT" == Adam Turoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
AT> I can't think of any builtins that use _, but it's going to be
AT> exposed by use english, so perhaps that qualifies it. I'm
AT> on the fence though. If it's going to be *_writeable, is_writable()
AT> looks better. It is tom's original proposal, after all.
fine with me. but i like f_ (or plain f) better as is_ doesn't work well
with access/modified etc. using f/F is more consistant and marks them as
file tests.
AT> Patches welcome for f/F.
that was about the execable part, not the f/F
AT> No, I chose execable intentionally. Probably change it to executable
AT> in v3 anyway.
who gave you permission to invent new words? :)
uri
--
Uri Guttman --------- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------- http://www.sysarch.com
SYStems ARCHitecture, Software Engineering, Perl, Internet, UNIX Consulting
The Perl Books Page ----------- http://www.sysarch.com/cgi-bin/perl_books
The Best Search Engine on the Net ---------- http://www.northernlight.com
