open my $fh, '>', $f or die "Can't write to $f: $!\n";

Won't open-ing the file named  $f in  '>' write mode clobber the current contents of the file at the same time it changes time/date? Wouldn't  '>>' append mode be better?

Assuming the file already exists, yes append mode would be better. If it doesn't already exist, then the two are equivalent. To make it more similar to touch it should be appending. You're right about that.

At least in my environment (AIX), opening the file in append mode without adding any content does not update the modification date of the file.

$: date
Thu Jan  7 09:37:01 CST 2016
$: touch step.file
$: ls -l step.file
-rw-r--r--    1 wlsedi   wlsedi            0 Jan 07 09:37 step.file
$: date
Thu Jan  7 09:38:01 CST 2016
$: touch step.file
$: ls -l step.file
-rw-r--r--    1 wlsedi   wlsedi            0 Jan 07 09:38 step.file
$:  date
Thu Jan  7 09:39:38 CST 2016
$: perl -de 1

Loading DB routines from perl5db.pl version 1.28
Editor support available.

Enter h or `h h' for help, or `man perldebug' for more help.

main::(-e:1):   1
DB<1> open $fh,'>>','step.file'
DB<2> close $fh
DB<3> q
$: ls -l step.file
-rw-r--r--    1 wlsedi   wlsedi            0 Jan 07 09:38 step.file
[download]

Opening in write does have the un-touchlike side effect of wiping out any content. In this particular instance, that is of no consequence, but using the code as a generic replacement for touch is problematic.

But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Romans 5:8 (NASB)

---

File::Touch if you want a generic replacement.

"Do you want the "latest file" as per the filesystem or the highest-sequence file as per your naming convention? Is the inode change time important? The modification time? Is it just the filename? What if the files get out of sync and you end up having S0007 but not S0006? Do you want to still delete S0005 if it exists? Why not sort your files, pop the two newest off the array, then delete the rest if making sure you have the two newest available is what you're actually trying to do?"

Sorting the files and popping the two newest off the array does sound like a good idea but I'll have to think about it and see if it works for my case. Thank you for the recommendation.

I thought about this and I think the best way to proceed in my case will be to look for a file with the biggest number (S0007 over S0005 for example), then look if the previous one is there, remove the previous one and proceed to create the next one. So if 7 is there, check if 6 is there, delete 6 and proceed to create 8. I'll have to think about the rest of my script and read up a tutorial to figure out my other issues, but if I can get past the thing that I just described it would be great. Can someone help me regarding how I can do that within my $step variable? How can I say "if we are at step x, check step x-1 exists and create step x+1"?

Can someone help me regarding how I can do that within my $step variable? How can I say "if we are at step x, check step x-1 exists and create step x+1"?

At this point you really should step back from your thinking on how to solve your "problem" and reexamine the overall task. Please say what you're really trying to do (beyond manipulating filenames), and especially what data you want to have available as your "backup."

It's possible that your whole premise "a script for data handling that will loop through a variety of files and do a variety of things" could be misguided.

The way forward always starts with a minimal test.

Thank you very much for your comment. I'll have to study it a bit but quickly let me ask you what you mean with sticking to a formatting standard? What formatting are you referring to? Sorry, I'm really a beginner, as if it's not obvious.