Re: functions that deal with hash should be more libera

[John Porter]

Nathan Torkington wrote:
> John Porter writes:
> > I suppose that's true.  But why would 
> >     %( foo => 1, bar => 2 )
> > be "working harder" than
> >     %{{ foo => 1, bar => 2 }}
> > ??? It's few keystrokes and would be a less tricky concept
> > to remember.
> 
> It's a new syntax, not orthogonal to anything we already have.  

So?  Perl's not like that.  Perl is diagonal.  And this is just
another corner being cut.

I have a list of stuff that looks a lot like a hash:

        ( foo => 1, bar => 2 )

Now, gol dern it, I want to treat it like a hash.  I want *perl*
to let me treat it like a hash.  Directly!
If not
        keys ( foo => 1, bar => 2 )

then

        keys %( foo => 1, bar => 2 )

Or *something*.


> I think the message is: Don't put time into the parser when your
> effort could better be spent in the optimizer.

Who "you"?  This is the -language list.

-- 
John Porter

        We're building the house of the future together.