[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: tables
- From: David Given <dg@...>
- Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2006 23:59:21 +0000
On Sunday 05 March 2006 23:39, D Burgess wrote:
> I think the behaviour is dangerous.
>
> > =#{nil,2}
Unexpected, yes, but you are *not allowed* to put nils into an array and
expect it to work as an array --- as soon as you do so, you stop being able
to reliably use the array operators and have to use the fully-fledged table
operators instead.
I wonder if it would be possible to have a debug option that could check for
this kind of thing? So that, say, tables with an empty hash part and a
non-empty array part produced a diagnostic if you tried to write a nil into
them? It would make it a little more obvious what was going on.
--
+- David Given --McQ-+
| dg@cowlark.com | Uglúk u bagronk sha pushdug Internet-glob bbhosh
| (dg@tao-group.com) | skai.
+- www.cowlark.com --+
Attachment:
pgp61vLVUGAw2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
