At 1:34 PM +0100 12/4/06, TSa wrote:
The coolest solution would be to have Bag in a module from where it supertypes Set when used. In this way you get the (x) to mean set operations unless a 'use Bag' is in scope. This supertyping approach would allow further Set supertypes like FuzzySet. But I don't know what the syntax looks like. Also combining these Set supertype modules might proof difficult. Once again 'FuzzySet does Set' could be more practical.
What you mention reminds me of the "use integer" pragma of Perl 5.
BTW, are the KeyHash, KeySet and KeyBag container types forced into hash sigiled variables? That is my %kh is KeyHash; my %ks is KeySet; my %kb is KeyBag;
I would expect that, like with ordinary Hashes, that I can use all of the above with $ sigiled variables (which is my preference in fact) or % sigiled variables, and the difference of semantics would be the same as with the Hash; a %foo = %bar would copy all the elements, while $foo = $bar would not.
-- Darren Duncan
