Front page | perl.perl6.language.data |
Postings from September 2000
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 10:22:17PM -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> Michael G Schwern writes:
> I was expecting those two crufty features to be removed. If they
> aren't, a third won't hurt.
Might want to add this assumption to the RFC. Or perhaps another RFC
to junk reset()'s current meaning.
> > > This would be equivalent to:
> > >
> > > foreach ($k,$v) (map { $_ => $hash{$_}
> > > sort
> > > keys %hash)
> > > { ... }
> >
> > What you proposed and what you put in your example doesn't quite play
> > out. C<sort keys %hash> returns just the sorted keys of %hash, but
> > your foreach example implies that both keys and values would be
> > returned, sorted by key. Both would be useful.
>
> That's what the map is for. (modulo syntax error in the map :-)
Okay, the example says on thing and the text of the proposal says
another.
So you're proposing that C<sort %hash> act like C<map { $_ =>
$hash{$_} } sort keys %hash>? I can live with that. Just clear it up
in the RFC.
--
Michael G Schwern http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/ schwern@pobox.com
Just Another Stupid Consultant Perl6 Kwalitee Ashuranse
<GuRuThuG> make a channel called Perl, and infest it with joking and
fun....it doesnt make alot of sense.
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next