in reply to Re: Why is this auto-quoted?
in thread Why is this auto-quoted?

One effect of these rules is that -bareword is equivalent to the string "-bareword"
Not really quit!. Check with B::Deparse, then you will discovery that -bareword is equalvalent to -'bareword' not '-bareword' 

perl -MO=Deparse -e'
use warnings;
use strict;

my %ha = ( -foo => "bar");

print %ha;
'

[download]
gives 
use warnings;
use strict;
my %ha = (-'foo', 'bar');
print %ha;
-e syntax OK

[download]
Though with "-foo" there is no need of "=>".

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Why is this auto-quoted?
by Anonymous Monk on Jul 31, 2013 at 03:39 UTC

    Not really quit!

    You know what the difference between -'foo' and '-foo' is? nothing

[reply]
      You know what the difference between -'foo' and '-foo' is? nothing
      Interesting to note that -'foo' and -'+foo' deparse to the same thing, -'foo'. This could be a gotcha if you needed the + sign.

      -QM
      --
      Quantum Mechanics: The dreams stuff is made of

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]

        This could be a gotcha if you needed the + sign.

        Sure, but why use the - in that case?

        :) see Re: Why is this auto-quoted? (because) and perlglossary#identifier and nans, infs, and vomit 

        $ perl -wle " print +foo"
Unquoted string "foo" may clash with future reserved word at -e line 1
+.
Name "main::foo" used only once: possible typo at -e line 1.
print() on unopened filehandle foo at -e line 1.

$ perl -wle " print -+foo"
Unquoted string "foo" may clash with future reserved word at -e line 1
+.
-foo

$ perl -wle " print -'+foo'"
-foo

$ perl -wle " print -(-foo)"
+foo

        [download]
[reply]
[d/l]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom