http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=736648


in reply to Quote and Quote-like Operators

No. One should choose the delimiters based on what they are wanting to avoid having to escape. If we used them only with {} then we would have to escape {} every time. Best to pick something else:

my $string = q/{(foo => "'bar'")}/;

jeffa

L-LL-L--L-LL-L--L-LL-L--
-R--R-RR-R--R-RR-R--R-RR
B--B--B--B--B--B--B--B--
H---H---H---H---H---H---
(the triplet paradiddle with high-hat)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Quote and Quote-like Operators
by grinder (Bishop) on Jan 16, 2009 at 08:35 UTC

    I used slash (/) delimiters for the longest time in my code, until it dawned on me that using a vi-compatible delimiter pair would allow me to bounce on the % key to go from the beginning to the end. (I believe this is written somewhere in the Perl documentation).

    As a result, qw() has become my preferred idiom, as has qq{}. Looking back at older code these days I find that q/a string/ lacks symmetry, and thus beauty.

    Getting back to the OP, isn't it much better if everyone uses these operators exactly in the way they are described in Perl manuals, I would say yes, that's a sensible default. But one should know when (and why) to break the rules.

    • another intruder with the mooring in the heart of the Perl

Re^2: Quote and Quote-like Operators
by setebos (Beadle) on Jan 15, 2009 at 21:37 UTC
    I see no difference between:
    my $string = q/{(foo => "'bar'")}/;
    and
    my $string = q{{(foo => "'bar'")}};

      That's only true when the curlies are properly nested within the string. Again, it depends. Sometimes the test of the proper nesting is a plus, sometimes it's a bother.

      My syntax highlighter does. Perhaps i did not pick the best example. My point is still valid.

      jeffa

      L-LL-L--L-LL-L--L-LL-L--
      -R--R-RR-R--R-RR-R--R-RR
      B--B--B--B--B--B--B--B--
      H---H---H---H---H---H---
      (the triplet paradiddle with high-hat)