Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from November 1999
In article <199911210533.AAA01763@monk.mps.ohio-state.edu>, Ilya Zakharevich <ilya@math.ohio-state.edu> wrote: >Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes writes: >> [D:\susv2]perl -wlne "eval $_; print $@ if $@" >> print length "\c\\" >> 2 >> print length "\c\" >> Can't find string terminator '"' anywhere before EOF at (eval 2) line 1, <> chunk 2. >> exit >> >> I lean toward considering the second of these a bug. > >Then read the docs. Thank you, I already did when you gave the doc reference before. I realise that this behavior is perfectly in accord with perlop/"Gory details"/"Finding the end". That doesn't mean it's not a bug. It just means that if it is a code bug it is also a doc bug. IMO, it also contradicts the beginning of perlop/"Gory details": > When presented with something which may have several > different interpretations, Perl uses the principle DWIM > (expanded to Do What I Mean - not what I wrote) to pick up > the most probable interpretation of the source. A: "\c\" B: "\c\"more string here" The question is, is the current incomprehesible behavior of string B more important to maintain than following DWIM for "string" A?Thread Previous | Thread Next