No. 99% of the time, the ease of using a hash instead of a module that will provide OO representation for you overrides the benefits of not using a hash.
A hash is, in nearly every case, the least efficient way of representing an object. Much better is to use an array. (This, by the way, is why pseudo-hashes were created in 5.6 - the attempt to marry hashes and arrays.) Even better (from a space perspective) is to use one array for your entire class (if this is possible). But, you have to both have a baseclass that would represent this and the ability to hand this kind of book-keeping over to another module.
------
We are the carpenters and bricklayers of the Information Age.
Don't go borrowing trouble. For programmers, this means Worry only about what you need to implement.
In reply to Re: Re: What is a "stash"?
by dragonchild
in thread What is a "stash"?
by John M. Dlugosz
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |