Dan Sugalski writes:
: At 11:30 AM 8/23/00 -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: >Dan Sugalski writes:
: >: I have had the "Well, Duh!" flash, though, and now do realize that having
: >: multiple iterators over a hash or array simultaneously could be rather
: >handy.
: >
: >You can also have the opposite "Well, Duh!" flash and realize that most
: >DBM implementations only support a single iterator at a time. For some
: >definition of support. That's the main reason for Perl's current
: >limitation.
:
: Fair enough. Removing the limit makes sense, though, both from a
: flexibility and a thread-safing standpoint. Might make sense for the
: hash/array slices the PDL folks want too, if that's how they get
: implemented, since I can see wanting to have many different hash or array
: slices.
No problem with that. We can always catch the DBM limitation at
runtime, and we're no worse off than we are now, unless people expect
to be able to turn on hash persistence transparently by tying to DBM.
But in actual fact, we almost always use keys rather than each, so it
probably doesn't matter.
Larry
