Re: Why will v-strings be deprecated

But 'v10' also looks like a bareword. Consider this:

sub u11 {"u11"}
sub v11 {"v11"}
sub w11 {"w11"}

print u11, v11, w11, v10;
__END__
u11v11w11
[download]

And that includes the new line.

There are more things that cause more confusion than they solve peoples problems:

print 65.66;    # prints '65.66'
print 65.66.67; # prints 'ABC'
[download]

And while you can use print v10 to print a newline, you can't use it to print two newlines (as opposed to one string with two newlines):

print v10;      # prints newline.
print v10, v10; # "No comma allowed after filehandle"
[download]

Abigail

Comment on Re: Why will v-strings be deprecated Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Why will v-strings be deprecated by ambrus (Abbot) on Oct 06, 2003 at 14:46 UTC
You're right. I think `10v` would've been a better syntax instead of `v10`. Letters after numbers could be used for some interesting purposes: for example `3a` could be short for `$_[3]`.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^2: Why will v-strings be deprecated by Dietz (Curate) on Jan 05, 2006 at 17:16 UTC
And while you can use print v10 to print a newline, you can't use it to print two newlines (as opposed to one string with two newlines): `print v10; # prints newline. print v10, v10; # "No comma allowed after filehandle"` [download] For this purpose the following works: `print v10 x 2; # prints 2 newlines` [download] Or even: `print v10 x 1, v10; # also prints 2 newlines` [download]	[reply] [d/l] [select]