At 03:39 PM 12/6/2001 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>So for example, open in an int context does a raw open,
>open in a scalar or PMC context does a fancy open (buffered
>or whatever) and returns a IO object?
Nope. Open always takes a string. We don't get fancy otherwise, though we
may have wa
So for example, open in an int context does a raw open,
open in a scalar or PMC context does a fancy open (buffered
or whatever) and returns a IO object?
Also, if you want the interface to be the same for all
these ops, how do you want callbacks implemented?
1) Are we doing callbacks?
2) If so, I
At 01:19 PM 12/6/2001 -0500, Melvin Smith wrote:
>Would we prefer to leave the current system call names as-is (open,close
>read,seek) as the direct call through versions and name
>the IO routines pio_open, ... or go the route of Perl and do
>sys_open, etc. for the raw system call versions and nam
Would we prefer to leave the current system call names as-is (open,close
read,seek) as the direct call through versions and name
the IO routines pio_open, ... or go the route of Perl and do
sys_open, etc. for the raw system call versions and name the Parrot IO
API as the default names (open,close)
