jv@mh.nl (Johan Vromans) (09/12/90)
Is it a weird idea to always treat lines following __END__ as input
for the program, even if the program itself is not read from standard
input?
E.g. assume "t.pl" is executable and contains
#!/usr/bin/perl
while ( <> ) {
print "-> $_";
}
__END__
data1
data2
Then "perl < t.pl" works, but "perl t.pl" and "t.pl" do not.
Johan
--
Johan Vromans jv@mh.nl via internet backbones
Multihouse Automatisering bv uucp: ..!{uunet,hp4nl}!mh.nl!jv
Doesburgweg 7, 2803 PL Gouda, The Netherlands phone/fax: +31 1820 62911/62500
------------------------ "Arms are made for hugging" -------------------------lwall@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV (Larry Wall) (09/13/90)
In article <1990Sep12.152018.2904@squirrel.mh.nl> Johan Vromans <jv@mh.nl> writes: : Is it a weird idea to always treat lines following __END__ as input : for the program, even if the program itself is not read from standard : input? Better not be weird. I already implemented it. : E.g. assume "t.pl" is executable and contains : : #!/usr/bin/perl : while ( <> ) { : print "-> $_"; : } : __END__ : data1 : data2 : : Then "perl < t.pl" works, but "perl t.pl" and "t.pl" do not. After the next patch, say #!/usr/bin/perl while ( <DATA> ) { print "-> $_"; } __END__ data1 data2 and it will work all the time. Note that this is upward compatible since we're reading off a filehandle that hasn't been explicitly opened. Larry