Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote: > > Arrays can be stored compactly and > > $a[1_000_000_000] = 'oh, really?' # :-) But that is far less common than @a{ 0..100 } = (...); which, if stored in a hash, would not only be significantly less efficient than an array, but could generally be expected to elicit some pathological behavior of the hashing function. -- John Porter
- Devils advocacy (Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace => (s... Nathan Torkington
- Re: Devils advocacy (Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace ... John Porter
- Re: Devils advocacy (Re: RFC 84 (v1) Repl... iain truskett
- Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace => (stringifying comma... Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace => (stringifying c... Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace => (stringifyi... Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace => (string... John Porter
- Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace => (stringifying c... John Porter
- Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace => (stringifying comma) wit... John Porter
- Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace => (stringifying comma... Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace => (stringifying comma) wit... John Porter
- Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace => (stringifying comma) wit... John Porter
- Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace => (stringifying comma) wit... Kai Henningsen
- Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace => (stringifying comma... Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace => (stringifying c... Nathan Torkington
- Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace => (stringifyi... Karl Glazebrook
- Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace => (stringifying comma... Chaim Frenkel
- Hashes vs arrays (was Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace... Jeremy Howard
- Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace => (stringifying comma) wit... Kai Henningsen