From: Lloyd Zusman <ljz@...>
Date: 2002-08-11T12:42:50+09:00
Subject: Re: Something that corresponds to Perl's -T and -B tests?

nobu.nokada@softhome.net writes:

> Hi,
>
> At Sun, 11 Aug 2002 11:41:00 +0900,
> Lloyd Zusman wrote:
>> I've written an extension to File::Stat which adds a textfile? and
>> binaryfile? method.  Each works pretty much the same as the file?
>> and directory? methods of File::Stat.  For example:
>
> Why not File::textfile? and so on?
>

Hello, and thank you for your feedback.

Well, to me, the textfile? and binaryfile? methods seem closer in
meaning to the file?, directory?, etc. methods of File::Stat.  And if
I'm not mistaken, the necessity to inspect the data inside of a file in
order to determine whether it's a text file or binary file is
OS-specific ... I believe that there are some OS's where this is just an
attribute of a file that can be determined by making some sort of system
call, in a similar way to which the inode, device, etc. are returned via
the Unix stat() system call.

So to me, textfile? and binaryfile? seem "stat-like", rather than
"file-like" methods.

But I don't have a strong objection to making this a method of File ...
to me, this is just a matter of personal taste, and I am flexible.


>>     def initialize(arg)
>>       @item = arg
>         super
>>     end

???  "super" doesn't work in place of __old_initialize(arg) in my code.
Neither does "super(arg)".  What would the superclass be in this case?


> Nobu Nakada


-- 
 Lloyd Zusman
 ljz@asfast.com