The open opcode

Jonathan Leto jaleto at gmail.com
Thu Apr 22 20:43:56 UTC 2010


Howdy,

moritz++ has a point. Can we deprecate the "open" opcode and tell
people to use the "open" method on either File or FileHandle PMC? The
downside is that we have to wait quite a while, due to the deprecation
cycle, for this to come into effect.

Would it be possible to make the open opcode use the File or
FileHandle PMC behind the scenes? That would fix my problem and not
require changing anything to end users as well as avoiding the
deprecation cycle.

Duke


On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Moritz Lenz <moritz at faui2k3.org> wrote:
> Jonathan Leto wrote:
>> Would making the open opcode a dynop create a noticeable decrease in
>> performance? That is the only reason I can see that we would not want
>> to go that route.
>
> As I mentioned on #parrot, it's not clear to me why 'open' needs to be
> an opcode (or a dynop, for that matter) at all. It sounds like the thing
> you'd find as a method call in a (core) library, really.
>
> So deprecating 'open' as an opcode (and replacing it by an appropriate
> library function, if that doesn't exist already) seems to solve that
> problem :-)
>
> Cheers,
> Moritz
> _______________________________________________
> http://lists.parrot.org/mailman/listinfo/parrot-dev
>



-- 
Jonathan "Duke" Leto
jonathan at leto.net
http://leto.net


More information about the parrot-dev mailing list