RE: what I meant about hungarian notation

[David Grove]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 11:51 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: what I meant about hungarian notation
>
>
> David Grove wrote:
> > $ is a singularity, @ is a multiplicity, and % is a
> multiplicity of pairs
> > with likely offspring as a result. ;-)
>
> Actually, % is also simply a multiplicity, differentiated only
> by the semantics of its indexing.
>
> Which is why I argued, some time back, in favor of conflating
> arrays and hashes.

Probably rehashing (no pun intended) a lost cause, but this sounds logical
to me, if you're referring to something similar to PHP's Array['text']
notation. I.e.,

$array[1]
$hash{'one'}

becoming

@group['one']

or something similar in Perl 6. Heretofore the issue may have been the
indexing done by hashes, but since these will become actual objects in Perl
6, *how* they are indexed could be a simple flag (sorted | numeric, sorted |
string, fast | string, etc.)

The result would be two types of variables: single and multiple.

But I imagine that this has been gone over many times.

p