>I'm not ignorant of the technology. But having a method that directly
>represents my thought process, and does something that I need would be
>a win for me.
Adding to the core infinitely more new functions in an environment
with people screaming to yank stuff out, and still worse, adding
new inherent *types* (or else incurring stupid costs) that are of
use to only a few, is something that just will not make sense to
me.
If this were so important, then the existing modules that already
do this would be being used all over the place. They aren't. You
must account for this lack. I believe this is nearly a non-existence
proof. I believe it's because hashes suffice. I have never seen
a posted program actually use the set modules, let alone such
prevalence of the same that a million people are crying to add some
brand new set type to the very core of the language.
You're going to have to work incredibly harder than you have to
justify adding a new fundamental type when what we already have
works perfectly fine. Yes, I do set operations. Yes, I do them
in Perl. No, I do not use fufi new types to do it. I simply
use the Perl we have, and it works excellently for this purpose.
--tom
