Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace => (stringifying comma) with =>

[Nathan Torkington]

John Porter writes:
> I think as long as equivalent (and better!) functionality is available,
> through equivalently terse syntax, who's to care?  Why is 
> 
>       $h{'foo'} = 'bar';
> 
> instrinsically preferable to
> 
>       assoc( %h, 'foo', 'bar' );

I'm horrified you have to ask this question.

Perl makes easy things easy.  Hashes are bloody useful, as the last
decade of Perl has borne out.  They deserve syntactic support because
they're used a lot and are worthy of a shorthand.

Anybody who seriously suggests that something that is commonly used in
Perl should become *harder* (also aka longer to type) needs mental
realignment.

There are many bad ways to do things, and I think this is one of them.

Nat