The extraneous commas are no problem.
That is one of the many improvements of Perl
versus C. These extra commas allow easier
additions to the hash with any of
Emacs, Vi, Notepad, Wordpad, Ultra-edit, or even ed.
Another possible style, which I prefer, consists in
writing the comma at the beginning of the next line,
not the end of the previous one.
Example:
my %switch_hash =
(
chrdex =>
{
DEX =>
{
'01-AUG-02' => 1
, '03-AUG-02' => 3
}
}
, uslcgb5e2sm =>
{
Greensboro =>
{
'4-AUG-02' => 1
, '6-AUG-02' => 2
}
},
, uslecat25e1 =>
{
'Atlanta II' => # quotation marks are required here
{
'1-AUG-02' => 1
, '2-AUG-02' => 3
, '3-AUG-02' => 1
, '4-AUG-02' => .25
}
}
);
This style also allows easier editing of the hash. | [reply] |
Another possible style, which I prefer, consists in writing the comma at the beginning of the next line, not the end of the
previous one.
That reminds me of the professor who gave us our first programming
classes back in university. He would write the semi-colons
before the statements, not after them. (This was in Pascal,
where semi-colons are statement separators, just like in Perl).
This style also allows easier editing of the hash.
Really? How? I see as disadvantage that if you remove the
first item you need to modify the next line. Or if you insert
an item at the beginning, you need to modify the next line too.
The big advantage of putting a comma after the items is that
you can always put a comma there, and don't have to do special
things when adding or removing elements - not even at the beginning
or end.
Abigail
| [reply] |
