in reply to Re^11: the annoying keys "key" and "value"
in thread the annoying keys "key" and "value"

Let me try to nail at least one tentacle of this jellyfish to the wall: When you're trying to represent a hash, you aren't trying to represent ordering between the elements. That much we agree on. So why would someone try to represent a hash with an array of two element hashes each with the keys "key" and "value"?
  • Comment on Re^12: the annoying keys "key" and "value"

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^13: the annoying keys "key" and "value"
by ikegami (Patriarch) on Dec 24, 2010 at 04:33 UTC

    So why would someone try to represent a hash with an array of two element hashes each with the keys "key" and "value"?

    "Represent a hash" makes no sense. I presume you mean "implement an associative array".

    Someone would do that if they wanted to preserve the order of the tuples. We've covered this multiple times already.

[reply]
      So you want to have an ordered associative array by using: [{'key'=>somekey1,'value'=>somevalue1},...] because that is superior to having: $order=[somekey1,somekey2,...]; and {somekey1=>somevalue1,...} ?

      Is this because using the associative array for its primary function -- looking up values from keys -- is so much more convenient and efficient your way?

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]

        It's not a question of efficiency, it's a question of actually working. $order=[somekey1,somekey2,...]; and {somekey1=>somevalue1,...} doesn't support more than one value with the same key.

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom