On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 08:01:46 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Green) wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Larry Wall) wrote:
> >S9 talk about it. We current have things like:
> > my Cat %pet is shape(Str);
> >and parameters to types are in square brackets, so it's more like:
> > my %pet is Hash[:shape(Str) :returns(Cat)];
>
> I still prefer "shaped", for pronounceability. Although "shape" is a
> bit of a stretch for something that's really more like "size", and even
> stretchier for describing hash keys. I'm not sure what better word we
> could use, though.
>
> is built # a constructive choice
> is determined # good for typing practice =P
> is bound # what if you're bound AND determined?
> is disposed # sounds like a destructor
> is composed # I kinda like this one
> is arrayed # oh, "array" in that other sense
> is reckoned # bet no other language has that as a keyword
> is cinched # it sounds so easy
> is confined # to quarters
> is walled # now we're just being silly (no offense to Larry)
> is earmarked # some people wouldn't hear of it
> is indexed # a bit better than "is keyed" (especially if it's your car)
> is sized # I think this was already rejected
> is like # works really well if your type happens to be 'Totally'
> is thus # very vague, but short
>
> Hm.
>
> On the other hand, imagining Type-shaped holes into which your hash
> keys fit *does* have a rather picturesque appeal...
>
>
> -David "the thesaurus is your friend (sometimes)" Green
I probably missed teh comprehensive dismissal thread, but why not 'type'?
my %pet is Hash[:type(Str) :returns(Cat)];
njs
