No, it isn't shell quoting territory, if you'd pay attention you'd see it is all passed as one argument.

Yes it is :) you're calling perl from a shell, this makes it shell quoting territory.

That this is a bug in perl doesn't change that.

SEE ALSO doesn't mean "THE ANSWER IS" it is is an addendum

How would someone from a different shell know the quoting rules without having a place to lookup the quoting rules?

So what anytime you call perl from the shell, you're dealing with the shell.. That doesn't mean the shell is the problem, or that it is related to the problem. And linking to a manual that details what the problem isn't, and then says what the problem /may/ be in the addendum must be the most useless suggestion ever. Take a hike.


Evan Carroll
The most respected person in the whole perl community.
www.evancarroll.com

I'd have thought the same thing if it weren't that it works even tho there is no '-' on the 'e', which says to me its not purely the shell playing tricks on us. Anyway, I can replicate in bash.

Now you've missed the point twice.

FWIW, it works on Windows as well, with suitable quoting, of course.

Now you've missed the point twice.

Nope. Even if this is a bug in perl, you're still dealing with a shell, so a SEE ALSO cannot possibly miss the point

Even if this is a bug in perl, you're still dealing with a shell

So, every time there is ever a bug with any unix command line program, you'll think it appropriate to link to some guide on shell quoting?

wtf-ever.

Anyone with enough clue to really understand and be interested by this in the first place, doesn't need a refresher on basics.

Why have you chosen to post anonymously?

Never mind. That's a rhetorical question.

-sauoq
"My two cents aren't worth a dime.";