In theory yes, IMHO practically many of those cases wouldn't be implemented with arrays right away.
For instance avoiding typos in keys - in cases where indices have to be reproduced correctly it's anyway better to use a hash.
And if performance prohibits using hashes, there is nothing faster than using constant lists because of constant folding at compilation ...
Cheers Rolf
In reply to Re^3: equivalent to Hash::Util for lists / arrays
by LanX
in thread equivalent to Hash::Util for lists / arrays
by Anonymous Monk
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |