Re: hash subscriptor

2004-04-10 Thread Gordon Henriksen
On Monday, March 15, 2004, at 11:05 , Larry Wall wrote: On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 07:54:09PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote: Larry Wall writes: And basically because I decided :foo('bar') is too ugly for something that will get used as often as switches are on the unix command line. The %hash syntax

Re: hash subscriptor

2004-03-28 Thread Scott Walters
{ $?foo{'baz'} ... $?baz } .../ > > : > or > > : > if / ... ... { $?foo«baz» ... $?baz } .../ > > : > > : I'm probably a bit behind on current thinking, but did %hash{bareword} > > : lose the ability to assume the bareword is a constant str

Re: hash subscriptor

2004-03-28 Thread Scott Walters
?baz } .../ > : > or > : > if / ... ... { $?foo«baz» ... $?baz } .../ > : > : I'm probably a bit behind on current thinking, but did %hash{bareword} > : lose the ability to assume the bareword is a constant string? > > It's thinking hard about doing that.

Re: hash subscriptor

2004-03-16 Thread John Williams
ing hard about doing that. :-) > > : And why «»? Last I heard that was the unicode version of qw(), which > : returns an array. Using an array constructor as a hash subscriptor is > : not a "least surprise" to me. > > We'd be trading that surprise for the surprise that %hash

Re: hash subscriptor

2004-03-15 Thread Larry Wall
bably a bit behind on current thinking, but did %hash{bareword} : > : lose the ability to assume the bareword is a constant string? : > : > It's thinking hard about doing that. :-) : > : > : And why «»? Last I heard that was the unicode version of qw(), which : > : returns

Re: hash subscriptor

2004-03-15 Thread Luke Palmer
ty to assume the bareword is a constant string? > > It's thinking hard about doing that. :-) > > : And why ÂÂ? Last I heard that was the unicode version of qw(), which > : returns an array. Using an array constructor as a hash subscriptor is > : not a "least surprise&

Re: hash subscriptor

2004-03-15 Thread Larry Wall
doing that. :-) : And why «»? Last I heard that was the unicode version of qw(), which : returns an array. Using an array constructor as a hash subscriptor is : not a "least surprise" to me. We'd be trading that surprise for the surprise that %hash{shift} doesn't call C.

hash subscriptor

2004-03-15 Thread John Williams
f / ... ... { $?foo«baz» ... $?baz } .../ I'm probably a bit behind on current thinking, but did %hash{bareword} lose the ability to assume the bareword is a constant string? And why «»? Last I heard, that was the unicode version of qw(), which returns an array. Using an array construc