There's limited value in having hashes interpolate directly; it's not as useful as interpolation of scalars and arrays. It would be very annoying though, as you would not be able to write

    printf "%d %s %f\n", $int, $str, $float;
[download]

because that would try to interpolate three hashes.

However, it's still relative simple to interpolate a hash:

    print "@{[%hash]}";
[download]

Abigail

Given

my $s = 'foo';
my @a = 1..10;
my $h = 1..10;

print "${s} @{a}"; # gives "foo 12345678910"
[download]

Is there anything that would conflict with print "%{h}"; from producing the same output as print "@{[ %h ]}";?

Given that "${s}" is the same as "$s" and "@{a}" is the same as "@a", then yes. It would mean that "%{f}" is the same as "%f", which would break a lot of code, even without considering printf formats.

Abigail