Re^4: double quote vs single quote oddities. I need enlightenment

Thanks again, I catch the second part now. I poorly phrased my first question. Let me take another stab at it.

Both split('\.',$foo) and split('\\.',$foo) return two parts "data1" and "txt". Since they are not interpolated the first one working really make sense. The second is still elusive. I would think it would be equivalent then to split /\\./, $foo but that is split into data1.txt and nothing as the literal [\.] is not encountered e.g. a real backslash following by any printable character and not an escaped dot getting passed to the regex engine.

Again, I am really trying not be a pest, but there is some subtlety that I am missing. I have gotten my head around everything except for this. Thanks!

Comment on Re^4: double quote vs single quote oddities. I need enlightenment

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: double quote vs single quote oddities. I need enlightenment by furry_marmot (Pilgrim) on Jul 08, 2010 at 18:27 UTC
In non-interpolated strings, a double-backslash is interpreted as a single back slash. `print '\\.', "\n", '\.', "\n"; ------ \. \.` [download] If you look at the docs for `split`, it specifically says it's expecting a `/PATTERN/`. So it interprets both `'\\.'` and `'\.'` as `/\./`. --marmot	[reply] [d/l] [select]