Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!bfmny0!tneff
From: tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.perl
Subject: Re: Patch 9 from outer space (was Re: Force script to use /bin/sh?)
Message-ID: <15188@bfmny0.UU.NET>
Date: 20 Feb 90 13:28:54 GMT
References: <15178@bfmny0.UU.NET> <7105@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV> <1990Feb18.190513.464@iwarp.intel.com> <15187@bfmny0.UU.NET> <7113@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>
Reply-To: tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff)
Lines: 15

In article <7113@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV> lwall@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV (Larry Wall) writes:
>You might say that you want it to act as if it were a shell.  But what if
>you say
>
> 	perl -c "myscript.pl arg1 arg2 | myotherscript.pl arg1 arg2"
>
>Should perl handle that?  How much shell syntax do I put into perl?

I was afraid he'd ask that :-) ;-)

I suppose it'd be a royal PITA to add that kind of thing.  All I can point
out is that if it WERE added, Perl would come that much closer to being
the universally flexible shell it's already darn close to now.

I, uh, wouldn't hold up Patch 9 for it.............................