Larry Wall wrote:
>
> The ~~ is a cute hack though.
Credit is due to Steve Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> who posted it to funwithperl.
...
> I'm sorry, my eyes go crossed when I look at that, and the two \Q's
> merge into one, which confuses me, in a stereoscopic sort of way.
I was wrong about \Q\E anyway. Apparently it gets optimized out of
the doublequoting process _BEFORE_ the interpolation occurs, so it cannot
break up the expression. Which is very odd since it happens _after_
interpolation normally since it affects interpoincluded parts of the
string.
metaquoting must happen multiple times in the course of the p5 interplation
process.
And \E\Q fails to have the first \E knock the
metaquote count into the negatives. \q is free however so why not use
define
\q as the zero-length noninterpolable expression, instead of tossing out
the
nifty if rarely used snap-on socket that is the metaquoting sequence?
> We could leave \Q{} as metaquote and use \E for a expression stopper,
> though that would be confusing to people used to the old \E, which is
> dead, dead, dead, drive a stake through its heart, dead. (I hope...)
>
> Larry
\Q{} seems like an alien in a land populated with qw, qh, qr, etc. Why not
join the parade and use qm, if abandoning \Q...\E?
print SCRIPT "touch $(qm($filename))";
