another newbie stupid question

Discussion in 'Perl Misc' started by maryellen sniffen, Dec 31, 2004.

  1. In the perldoc's, when something is double-quoted, it looks like the opening
    double quote is actually 2 backticks ( ``$string" ). Is this a programming
    convention that I would have learned had I gone to formal school for
    computer science, or am I missing something. On my screen, double quotes
    look like ths ( "$string" ).
    Please educate me.
    Thank You
    maryellen sniffen, Dec 31, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. maryellen sniffen

    Anno Siegel Guest

    maryellen sniffen <> wrote in comp.lang.perl.misc:
    > In the perldoc's, when something is double-quoted, it looks like the opening
    > double quote is actually 2 backticks ( ``$string" ). Is this a programming
    > convention that I would have learned had I gone to formal school for
    > computer science, or am I missing something. On my screen, double quotes
    > look like ths ( "$string" ).


    Those are called "smart quotes" (google for some background). They are by
    no means specific to Perl, or even to programming. The particular rendering
    depends on what is available in your font -- some look better than others.

    Anno
    Anno Siegel, Dec 31, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. maryellen sniffen

    Lars Eighner Guest

    In our last episode, <cr3nh5$4m$-Berlin.DE>,
    the lovely and talented Anno Siegel broadcast on
    comp.lang.perl.misc:

    > maryellen sniffen <> wrote in comp.lang.perl.misc:
    >> In the perldoc's, when something is double-quoted, it looks like the opening
    >> double quote is actually 2 backticks ( ``$string" ). Is this a programming
    >> convention that I would have learned had I gone to formal school for
    >> computer science, or am I missing something. On my screen, double quotes
    >> look like ths ( "$string" ).


    > Those are called "smart quotes" (google for some background). They are by
    > no means specific to Perl, or even to programming. The particular rendering
    > depends on what is available in your font -- some look better than others.



    However, plain old single backticks on both sides `something`
    *do* mean something specialĀ (namely, execute the system command
    something and put the output here), so beware.

    --
    Lars Eighner http://www.io.com/~eighner/
    War On Terrorism: Joe McCarthy Brigade
    "The decadent left in its enclaves on the coasts is not dead -- and may well
    mount a fifth column." Andrew Sullivan, _The New Republic_
    Lars Eighner, Dec 31, 2004
    #3
  4. maryellen sniffen

    Anno Siegel Guest

    Lars Eighner <> wrote in comp.lang.perl.misc:
    > In our last episode, <cr3nh5$4m$-Berlin.DE>,
    > the lovely and talented Anno Siegel broadcast on
    > comp.lang.perl.misc:
    >
    > > maryellen sniffen <> wrote in comp.lang.perl.misc:
    > >> In the perldoc's, when something is double-quoted, it looks like the opening
    > >> double quote is actually 2 backticks ( ``$string" ). Is this a programming
    > >> convention that I would have learned had I gone to formal school for
    > >> computer science, or am I missing something. On my screen, double quotes
    > >> look like ths ( "$string" ).

    >
    > > Those are called "smart quotes" (google for some background). They are by
    > > no means specific to Perl, or even to programming. The particular rendering
    > > depends on what is available in your font -- some look better than others.

    >
    >
    > However, plain old single backticks on both sides `something`
    > *do* mean something specialĀ (namely, execute the system command
    > something and put the output here), so beware.


    True in Perl code, but not in POD, where these are coming from.

    Anno
    Anno Siegel, Dec 31, 2004
    #4
  5. maryellen sniffen <> wrote:

    > Subject: another newbie stupid question



    Please put the subject of your article in the Subject of your article.

    Your article is not about newbie questions, it is about displaying
    Perl's docs.


    > In the perldoc's, when something is double-quoted, it looks like the opening
    > double quote is actually 2 backticks ( ``$string" ).



    It does NOT look like that in the *.pod files.

    It may look like that in whatever display you are looking at
    it in though. (in which case it is the displaying that is broken
    rather than the docs that are broken.)

    Are you talking about the output of the "perldoc" program?

    Or is this on some website?


    > Is this a programming
    > convention that I would have learned had I gone to formal school for
    > computer science,



    Heavens no!

    Pretty much exactly the opposite in fact. Formally schooled CS
    folks are much less likely be members of Bill's cult.

    I expect that what you are seeing is the effect of classic
    Microsoft "embrace and extend" lockin.

    In this case, I'm guessing M$'s "smart quotes" are not being
    all that smart...


    We can't really help you fix the display until you tell us
    what display it is that needs fixing.


    --
    Tad McClellan SGML consulting
    Perl programming
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Tad McClellan, Dec 31, 2004
    #5
  6. Anno Siegel wrote:

    > maryellen sniffen <> wrote in comp.lang.perl.misc:
    >> In the perldoc's, when something is double-quoted, it looks like the
    >> opening double quote is actually 2 backticks ( ``$string" ). Is this a
    >> programming convention that I would have learned had I gone to formal
    >> school for computer science, or am I missing something. On my screen,
    >> double quotes look like ths ( "$string" ).

    >
    > Those are called "smart quotes" (google for some background). They are by
    > no means specific to Perl, or even to programming. The particular
    > rendering depends on what is available in your font -- some look better
    > than others.
    >

    Since "smart quotes" are a Windows perversion, I assume this is particular
    to the perldocs shipped with Active Perl. Certainly none of the perldocs
    on my systems have this...thing.
    --
    Christopher Mattern

    "Which one you figure tracked us?"
    "The ugly one, sir."
    "...Could you be more specific?"
    Chris Mattern, Dec 31, 2004
    #6
  7. maryellen sniffen

    Peter Scott Guest

    In article <>,
    Tad McClellan <> writes:
    >maryellen sniffen <> wrote:
    >> In the perldoc's, when something is double-quoted, it looks like the opening
    >> double quote is actually 2 backticks ( ``$string" ).

    >
    >It does NOT look like that in the *.pod files.


    Opening quotes often do:

    % grep \`\` *.pod | wc -l
    62

    However, they are paired with two single quotes (``...'') and
    not a double quote (") as the poster alleged. However^2, in
    many fonts it can be very difficult to distinguish '' from ".

    --
    Peter Scott
    http://www.perldebugged.com/
    *** NEW *** http://www.perlmedic.com/
    Peter Scott, Dec 31, 2004
    #7
  8. maryellen sniffen

    Scott Bryce Guest

    Tad McClellan wrote:

    > It may look like that in whatever display you are looking at
    > it in though. (in which case it is the displaying that is broken
    > rather than the docs that are broken.)


    I think what is broken is the OS's method of copying "smart" quotes and
    pasting them into a program that does not support smart quotes.


    > In this case, I'm guessing M$'s "smart quotes" are not being
    > all that smart...


    Bingo!


    > We can't really help you fix the display until you tell us
    > what display it is that needs fixing.


    I see this from time to time on websites that have content copied from
    the docs.
    Scott Bryce, Dec 31, 2004
    #8
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Byte
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    445
  2. Brandon McCombs
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    513
    Richard Wheeldon
    Aug 28, 2006
  3. Ed Dana
    Replies:
    35
    Views:
    952
    Rolf Magnus
    Jan 31, 2007
  4. Darren
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    416
    Martin Honnen
    Mar 13, 2007
  5. rincewind

    stupid, STUPID question!

    rincewind, Apr 19, 2009, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    25
    Views:
    1,018
Loading...

Share This Page