From: Simon Cozens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 11:57:54AM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> >
> > Makes sense to have it for containers indexed by scalar as well.
>
> I'll say it again for the l^W^W^W - arrays and hashes are conceptually
> very different beasts.
strings, integers, longs, and floats are conceptually very different
beasts.
> Shopping list, phone book. Different things.
String, Integer, Long, Float. Each a different thing
^^^^^
Hash, Array, tree. Each different things
^^^^^^
Isn't the gist of the debate that if a Scalar can be any thing, surely a
INSERT-NAME-HERE can be any "things"? Now I'm not endorsing either side,
but at least I see the conflate things things like Perl conflates thing
things argument.
To me... Scalars, Arrays, and Hashes are just data structures for which
Perl provides special syntax.
Element: any thing
Scalar: zero dimensional array containing one element
Array: collection of elements distinguished by integer subscripts
Hash: an array with element subscripts
And as far as things things go, there isn't conceptual much difference
between integer and element subscripted arrays. Whether or not that merits
the conflation of hashes and arrays into using a common prefix or not...
that's a different question. Which BTW, Larry seems to have answered for
himself long ago. But did Larry etch that decision in stone or jello?
Garrett
