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

[Nathan Torkington]

Stephen P. Potter writes:
> Why is it silly?  Hashes and arrays are *conceptually* very similar
> (even if they are extremely different implementation-wise).

If that were the case, I think students would have an easier time
grasping hashes.  It seems very common (yes yes, you all got them
immediately, but merely by piping up and saying so, you do not
invalidate my point, so please don't) that beginners take a long time
to use hashes because they find them hard to get their heads around.

This isn't why it's silly, just a comment on the idea that hashes
and arrays are conceptually very similar.

> # Same thing, using explicit
> %hash = (fn => "Bob", ln => "Smith", 0 => 10, 1 => 15, age => 35);

I have never wanted this kind of structure.  It seems a ridiculous
data structure to want.  Keys are almost always heterogeneous in my
world.  I like Perl being able to optimize internally based on my
simple one-character data typing (%).

What are you trying to make easy with this?

Nat