the shebang line is actually a *nix characteristic (since perl is native to *nix), and in a native windows perl implementation (activeperl for instance), i think the shebang is ignored altogether, as the file is usually executed by perl through a Windows Explorer file association.
__________
Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
- Terry Pratchett
| [reply] |
in a native windows perl implementation (activeperl for instance), i think the shebang is ignored altogether,
Not so.
C:\test>perl
#! perl -c
$x = 1;
^Z
- syntax OK
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
Lingua non convalesco, consenesco et abolesco. -- Rule 1 has a caveat! -- Who broke the cabal?
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
| [reply]
[d/l] |
yes, but you're coding directly into the perl interpeter. i mean if you execute a prewritten .pl file thats associated with the perl compiler.
__________
Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
- Terry Pratchett
| [reply]
[d/l] |
...usually executed by perl through a Windows Explorer file association.
I don't know the truth value of that statement, but "usually" is pretty broad-brush and unless I'm being even denser than usual, I don't see anything in OP's statement of the problem to support or rebut the notion that the script is being invoked via an association.
I also have a notion (but not the time right now to check my recall) that "the shebang is ignored altogether" is also subject to some qualifications or exceptions. <- yep, I may be wrong, but will try to recheck this later. In the meantime, let us hope that wiser ones will confirm or rebut?
| [reply] |