Brethren

Aren't "\cI" and "\t" equivalent? I'm seeing this oddly different behavior (as seen from the debugger): 

DB<1>  x "ARTICLE\tNOUN" =~ /^(ARTICLE\cI)(.+)/x
0  'ARTICLE'
1  "\cINOUN"
  DB<2> x "ARTICLE\tNOUN" =~ /^(ARTICLE\t)(.+)/x
0  "ARTICLE\cI"
1  'NOUN'

[download]
The \t gets captured in the first set of parens when I use \t, but not when I use \cI. I don't understantd <1> at all - if the \t isn't captured in the first set of parens, I don't see how the match succeeded. \cI and \t seem to be handled the same way in strings. Is there a subtle difference in regexes?

I'm running v5.8.8 built for i386-linux-thread-multi

In reply to \cI vs \t in regex by throop

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.