in reply to Re^3: Syntax Highlighting Editors Beware
in thread Syntax Highlighting Editors Beware

Ah! Now you thought about that for more than my recommended 30 seconds didn't you?

After another 30 seconds of deep meditation I divine that the obvious thing to do is disambiguate them in usual way. Just quote them!


Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
"Too many [] have been sedated by an oppressive environment of political correctness and risk aversion."
  • Comment on Re^4: Syntax Highlighting Editors Beware

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Syntax Highlighting Editors Beware
by zentara (Cardinal) on Aug 09, 2008 at 18:21 UTC
    Then you bring up the problem of multiple nested quotes when you mix vars_with_spaces and constants
    my $with = 2; my $with spaces in them = 4; #which is more readable? print "$with spaces in them "$with spaces in them"\n"; #or print "$with spaces in them $with_spaces_in_them\n";
    You will never convince me that spaces in variable names makes things better. Microsoft's mistake number 1 was \r\n as a linefeed, mistake number 2 was spaces in variables and filenames.

    I'm not really a human, but I play one on earth Remember How Lucky You Are
        Doh, I have to stop posting on Saturdays. You can pull my chain, but sometimes I don't light up. :-) On the topic though, instead of quoting, it may work by using the same variable identifier to end the variable.... it would eliminate all confusion and allow "any" characters like tab, newlines, line returns, etc. It would make obfuscated code very easy.
        my $var with spaces and \t tabs$ = 1; my @arr ay@ = (); my %ha sh%= ();
        Maybe I should stop posting on Sundays too. :-)

        I'm not really a human, but I play one on earth Remember How Lucky You Are