[Catalyst] Remove .pl from scripts?

[Christopher H. Laco]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Sebastian Riedel wrote:
> 
> Am 19.11.2005 um 18:16 schrieb Christopher H. Laco:
> 
>> How about some more fact rather than a quip?
>> I believe SciTE is a rather well known non broken editor in that
>> reqpest. I would wager that the majority of all editors check the file
>> extension as the very first check in mapping files to languages and
>> language parsers.
>>
>> I would also argue that having an editor guess what my file is by it's
>> contents is more prone to error than the file extension.
> 
> 
> Vim and TextMate work well without extension.


That's nice. I'm not on a mac, and not everyone uses vim/emacs.
LEt's not get into thew editor wars. My point is, let's not hinder
peoples abilites just because one attendee is afraid of file extensions.

> 
>>
>> How is that?
>>
>> Here's a file:  /usr/local/myfile
>>
>> What is it? Yup, you can't tell without opening it first, or TRYING to
>> run it. If it has no shebang of execute bit, you're screwed. Now you
>> have to open it to figure out how to run it.
> 
> 
> But we are talking about "script/myapp_server" with execute bit.

My point stands. It's a consistancy thing. All perl files should have
there proper extensions. Having some with, and some without just creates
more confusion.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDf2DZ+66dLHM50ssRAhz7AJ9/Lrm3uemsNmMVO8y7hVwgdm/dLQCghOfA
KKPgBRmilG1tT3PCrlKTXfU=
=07Pe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----