On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 11:28:02AM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote: : Though the hash "handles" handler hardly seems useful to me. Perhaps : someone can explain what that's intended to accomplish.
No idea. It just seemed like it ought to be made to mean something. On the other hand, maybe making %:handlers special is wrong, and it should delegate by default to an Array object. In which case we'd need a different declaration for cascading handlers, and there's no pressure to make %:hash mean anything special. If this were English, we'd just make it "handle" instead. But that's a rather subtle distinction. Don't anyone suggest »handles... :-) Larry
