Update: sorry just having a laugh at the responses to this node; we certainly are an egotistical bunch of humans, aren't we, when we respond to a question with an answer to the question we think they should have asked. But I think it's impolite to do that without first stating that a)you think the thread author is misguided and b)why you think the author may be misguided. There's nothing wrong with providing alternative methods, but this was a very specific question.. and to state that this answer was "better fitting" is incredibly presumptuous..
Update 2: May I point out that this reply (it was a saint that posted it) directly insulted and denegrated an esteemed friar. How many friars do we have that don't know what a hash is? Therefore don't you think it would have been worth treating this friar with respect and paying attention to the question he asked instead of lecturing him like a neophyte?
In reply to Re^2: Using variables in array names
by monarch
in thread Using variables in array names
by Lhamo_rin
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |