I don't think so. If the manual had meant "/.../", it would have written "/.../". I think the manual page says "?...?" because it means "?...?". Why do you think the manual page would use a rarely used construct, if it meant an often used one?
| [reply] |
Good question. Looks like a logical error on my part, if so, mea culpa. After taking a cursory look through Switch.pm I can't see why "?..?" should cause a different error from "/../", but then again it's not obvious to me why either should cause an error at all, so that's not saying much.
To be honest, if I were having the OP's problem I'd still try replacing all "/../" with "m/../" (well, no, I'd rewrite the code to not use Switch.pm, but anyway) just on the off-chance, so maybe my first node still has some merit.
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it. -- Brian W. Kernighan
| [reply] |