In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Larry Wall) wrote: >S9 talk about it. We current have things like: > my Cat %pet is shape(Str); >and parameters to types are in square brackets, so it's more like: > my %pet is Hash[:shape(Str) :returns(Cat)];
I still prefer "shaped", for pronounceability. Although "shape" is a bit of a stretch for something that's really more like "size", and even stretchier for describing hash keys. I'm not sure what better word we could use, though. is built # a constructive choice is determined # good for typing practice =P is bound # what if you're bound AND determined? is disposed # sounds like a destructor is composed # I kinda like this one is arrayed # oh, "array" in that other sense is reckoned # bet no other language has that as a keyword is cinched # it sounds so easy is confined # to quarters is walled # now we're just being silly (no offense to Larry) is earmarked # some people wouldn't hear of it is indexed # a bit better than "is keyed" (especially if it's your car) is sized # I think this was already rejected is like # works really well if your type happens to be 'Totally' is thus # very vague, but short Hm. On the other hand, imagining Type-shaped holes into which your hash keys fit *does* have a rather picturesque appeal... -David "the thesaurus is your friend (sometimes)" Green