more useful options | |
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
I'm not certain I'm concerned about consistency, if ever there were a time to make a change, this is it (1).
I'm also not sure I understand the motive for optimization at this point (2,3)-- it seems premature... but I will defer to your experience. I am certain I haven't had any problems keeping my Ruby hashes and arrays separate (4)-- and those don't even have sigils (of course, a simple naming convention might keep them straight, but what a pain if you decide to switch an object from one class to another-- indeed, the Perl sigils have this same annoying property). As to 5, I think I'll wait for Ex5, since I've not yet internalized A5, but I don't see how the brackets/brace is a problem if you are assigning a series of key/values to a hash. Larry appears to be proposing / %hash{key}:=(val) %hash{key2}:=(val2) / I don't think that / %hash['key']:=(val) %hash['key2']:=(val2) / would be any less acceptable or readable once the programmer gets used to brackets (and using literals instead of bare words). I certainly like the notion of having something like %hash = ($x =~ /key:=(val) key2:=(val2) / ) available, but I didn't see that in A5 (maybe I missed it?). In reply to (ichi) Re x 4: Apocalypse 5 and regexes
by ichimunki
|
|