Something like this should work:

#!/usr/bin/env perl

use strict;
use warnings;
use Data::Dumper;

while (<DATA>) {
    chomp;
    my @ar = split(/\|/ => $_);
    s/\\n/\n/g for @ar;
    warn Dumper @ar;
}

__DATA__
1|99999|Here comes \n a new line
[download]

Edit: the fat arrow in the split is just a personal preference of mine. I find it's easier to look at, though split(/\|/, $_) or split /\|/ work just as fine as well.

I would imagine it would be more efficient to do the substitution before the split.

No needless iterating then.

Something like this:

while (<DATA>) {
    chomp;
    s/\\n/\n/g;           ## Avoiding $_ is sometimes
    my @ar = split /\|/;  ## even more fun than using
    warn Dumper @ar;      ## it. ;P
}
[download]

++ regarding the substitution before the split.

Regarding use of $_, I do tend to avoid that myself, however it can make some examples more clear. Notice I left it out of the chomp and another example in the edit.

Thanks, that works. I didn't try substituting in the code because I had already tried using various forms in the data file. Is there a way I can change the \n in the data file that will prevent a code change? Just curious.

Can you provide more input sample? For instant 2 full records from the file.

@arr = split /\|/;
for (my $x = 0; $x < @arr; $x++) {
    if ($arr[$x] =~ m/\n/) {
        $arr[$x] = "\"".$arr[$x]."\"";
    }
}
$dbh->execute(@arr);
[download]

chilledham makes a good point, i should have seen it.. the \ and n are being treated as individual characters

@arr = split /\|/;
for (my $x = 0; $x < @arr; $x++) {
    $arr[$x] =~ s/\\n/\n/g;
}
$dbh->execute(@arr);
[download]

Been seeing this for (my $x = 0; $x < @arr; $x++) sort of thing around the Monastery of late.

Is there a reason people prefer it to for (@arr)?

or is there no reason at all?

If you've actually seen that, I hope the node had acquired some corrective replies.

Perhaps what you've actually seen is:

for (my $i = 0, $i < $#arr, $i++) {
#corrections  ^      ^^           ^
#strictly speaking, the commas instead of semis are merely my preferen
+ces
    do something...;
}
<br>
<c>
[download]

because the line you posted won't even compile... whereas the example in this node is basicly a C-style loop, possible written that way to show the counter.

C:\>perl -E "my @arr=qw(foo bar baz);for (my $x = 0; $x < @arr; $x++){
+ say $x };"
0
1
2
[download]

My apologies to all those electrons which were inconvenienced by the creation of this post.

I do not like using $_ I like to know exactly which element is called. Also $#arr returns the last index of the array while @arr returns the number of elements, the difference is $x <= $#arr vs $x < @arr.

my $string = 'Here comes \n a new line';
$string = eval "qq#$string#";
print $string;
[download]

Probably dangerous.

Probably dangerous.

...dangerous.

Yes shure, may be.

But what do you suggest?

Doesn't that mean that we should avoid eval as well as do?

And isn't the usage of eval and do sometimes very handy?

And btw: what about M-x load-file or something similar in emacs/elisp?

Always risky?

Best regards, Karl

«The Crux of the Biscuit is the Apostrophe»