On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 09:01:41AM -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > On 4/10/12 11:10 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote: > >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 06:49:07PM -0700, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > >>On Tuesday, April 10, 2012 18:44:40 H. S. Teoh wrote: > >>>TDPL, p.117, last para: > >>> > >>> ... For a user-defined type to be used as a key in an > >>> associative array, it must define two special methods, opHash > >>> and opCmp. > >>> > >>>Really? I thought the convention was toHash (TDPL, p.205). So, which is > >>>it? Which *should* it be? > >>> > >>>To me, it seems utterly arbitrary that classes should use toHash whereas > >>>non-class user-defined types should use opHash. Shouldn't we make it > >>>consistent across the board? > >> > >>I expect that opHash was a mistake and that there should be an errata > >>for that line on page 117: http://erdani.com/tdpl/errata/ > >[...] > > > >Actually, I looked, but it wasn't listed. > > > >Andrei? Is this an error? > > Most likely! [...]
So this should be added to the errata, then? T -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
