in reply to Use of single quotes versus double quotes

Are there huge time savings

In this case, absolutely none. Both forms are compiled down into constant strings:

The compiler will also fold things like "hello, world\n" and 'hello, world' . "\n" into the same constant strings. It's only when interpolation in a double string comes into play that things change:

% perl -MO=Concise -e 'print qq{hello, $world\n}' a <@> leave[1 ref] vKP/REFC ->(end) 1 <0> enter ->2 2 <;> nextstate(main 1 -e:1) v ->3 9 <@> print vK ->a 3 <0> pushmark s ->4 - <1> ex-stringify sK/1 ->9 - <0> ex-pushmark s ->4 8 <2> concat[t2] sKS/2 ->9 6 <2> concat[t1] sK/2 ->7 4 <$> const(PV "hello, ") s ->5 - <1> ex-rv2sv sK/1 ->6 5 <$> gvsv(*world) s ->6 7 <$> const(PV "\n") s ->8 -e syntax OK

... which is only slightly different to...

% perl -MO=Concise -e 'print qq{hello, } . $world . qq{\n}' a <@> leave[1 ref] vKP/REFC ->(end) 1 <0> enter ->2 2 <;> nextstate(main 1 -e:1) v ->3 9 <@> print vK ->a 3 <0> pushmark s ->4 8 <2> concat[t4] sKS/2 ->9 6 <2> concat[t2] sK/2 ->7 4 <$> const(PV "hello, ") s ->5 - <1> ex-rv2sv sK/1 ->6 5 <$> gvsv(*world) s ->6 7 <$> const(PV "\n") s ->8 -e syntax OK

The above both amount to much the same thing. So basically, you can always use double quotes, interpolate when you need to, and do not worry about performance.

• another intruder with the mooring in the heart of the Perl

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Use of single quotes versus double quotes
by gam3 (Curate) on Dec 08, 2006 at 23:31 UTC
    You still need to take into account the complile time (if that is the correct terminology). But it does not seem that there is any real difference there either.