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

[Jeremy Howard]

Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 08:37:21AM +1000, Jeremy Howard wrote:
> > Stephen P. Potter wrote:
> > > Lightning flashed, thunder crashed and John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > whispered
> > > :
> > > | Here's a counter-proposal: throw out hashes as a separate internal
> > > | data type, and in its place define a set of operators which treat
> > > | (properly constructed) arrays as associative arrays.  It's the
> > >
> > > Doesn't it make more sense to get rid of arrays and just use hashes?
> > >
> > No, neither proposal makes sense. Arrays can be stored compactly and
>
> $a[1_000_000_000] = 'oh, really?' # :-)
>
  my int @a: sparse;
  $a[1_000_000_000] = 'Yes, really!' # :P

OK, so I cheated... I haven't submitted my RFC for a 'sparse' attribute yet.
My point is that arrays *can* be stored compactly, not that they always
*are*. Another type of array storage is that required for lazily generated
lists (see RFC 81)

  http://tmtowtdi.perl.org/rfc/81.pod