%Data_Hash = ( Call_Hash => { TST_IDS_Large_1 =>2.9E-12, TST_IDS_Large_2 =>1.85E-12, TST_IDS_Small_1 =>1.86E-9, TST_IDS_Small_2 =>2.83E-9, }, OPT_VGS_1 =>0, OPT_VGS_2 =>0.02, );
{key1 => val1, key2 => val2} returns a scalar pointer to a hash with the key value pairs listed. In order to interact with it, your code would read:
@idlarge = ($Data_Hash{Call_Hash}{"TST_" . "IDS_Large_1"}, $Data_Hash{Call_Hash}{"TST_" . "IDS_Large_2"}, ...)
or
@idlarge = ($Data_Hash{Call_Hash}->{"TST_" . "IDS_Large_1"}, $Data_Hash{Call_Hash}{"TST_" . "IDS_Large_2"}, ...)
since consecutive indices contain an implicit deference.
Update: I misunderstood the spec. Assuming that your access methods are correct, you actually want two completely separate hashes. The values of %Call_Hash are being used as keys in the %Data_Hash. The data structures you want are given by:
%Data_Hash = ( OPT_VGS_1 =>0, OPT_VGS_2 =>0.02, ); %Call_Hash = ( TST_IDS_Large_1 =>2.9E-12, TST_IDS_Large_2 =>1.85E-12, TST_IDS_Small_1 =>1.86E-9, TST_IDS_Small_2 =>2.83E-9, );
except that the values of %Call_Hash should correspond to keys in %Data_Hash.
In reply to Re: Hash Within A Hash
by kennethk
in thread Hash Within A Hash
by forgedascendant
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |