Thomas Seiler skribis 2004-09-07 20:23 (+0200): > I touhght that it be nice to let module writers somehow associate their > module with a file extention.
Most worlds don't use file extensions, except for humans. In the Windows world, file extensions do matter, because it decides which program to use to run the file, how to extract the icon from the file and often even whether to scan it for viruses or not. In my world (Linux, commandline), I only use ".pl" to remind me to use the file with perl. I could just as well have used ".sh", ".c", ".exe" or even "[EMAIL PROTECTED]:\>%% ~*?#$ @$^%". In fact, it does not need an extension at all, because the . isn't special. I can use any character except \0 and /. If I want, I can use _ to separate "base name" from "extension", because my operating system has no idea that the . that some files have, has a special meaning to me. I have many text files without any extension, many executable files with extensions. I have some text files ending in ".txt" and many executables with no extension at all. Even if perl wanted to associate a module with a file extension, I doubt there would be any way to make this work with all platforms it's going to run on. In fact, I don't doubt that perl will work an platforms without a filesystem :) Juerd
