Me writes: > > > union: > > > intersection : > > > > How would this work for hashes with differing properties? > > > > %a ^is strict_keys; > > %b ^is no_strict_keys; > > > > What would happen? >
in the resulting hash only ( and all ) keys of %a will be present. because %b *admits* unknown keys but %a does not. although I admit that property names can be much better . > That's one reason why I suggested control of this sort > of thing should be a property of the operation, not of > the operands. > > -- > ralph > > arcadi .
