Re: functions that deal with hash should be more liberal

[John Porter]

In 42 lines, of which 25 were waste, Jerrad Pierce wrote:
> 
> a) why this is the Wrong Thing

It is simply not the way perl works.  In these matters at least, perl is
quite consistent.


> c) something to refute Do What I Mean

DWIM is cutesy, but not actually meaningful.  Perl comes closer to dwim
than most any other language, but dwim is not really a perl goal.
Instead, you should persuasively explain why your proposed change 
significantly furthers perl's real goal of making easy things easy
and hard things possible.   You already have a way of constructing
and dereferencing (accessing) an anonymous hash on the fly; what else
do you need?

-- 
John Porter

        We're building the house of the future together.