|
01:53
habere-et-disper left
01:57
Manifest0 left
03:30
librasteve_ left
04:44
deadmarshal_ left
05:49
deadmarshal_ joined
11:49
Manifest0 joined
12:30
habere-et-disper joined
|
|||
| habere-et-disper | What's the logic behind array indexing appearing to autovivify an array, but hash indexing doesn't ? | 12:36 | |
| Contrast | |||
| m: say ('foo' => 42, 'bar' => 24).[ 0 ] | |||
| camelia | foo => 42 | ||
| habere-et-disper | with | ||
| m: say ('foo' => 42, 'bar' => 24).{ 'foo' } | |||
| camelia | Type List does not support associative indexing. in block <unit> at <tmp> line 1 |
||
| habere-et-disper | I know `('foo' => 42, 'bar' => 24).Hash{ 'foo' } works. | ||
| lizmat | ('foo' => 42, 'bar' => 24) is a List of Pairs | 12:44 | |
| *not* a hash | |||
| dd %('foo' => 42, 'bar' => 24)<foo> | |||
| m: dd %('foo' => 42, 'bar' => 24)<foo> | |||
| camelia | 42 | ||
| lizmat | %() creates a hash | 12:45 | |
| habere-et-disper | It's not an array -- yes -- but you can array index it -- why does hash indexing not do the same magic ? | 12:46 | |
| ab5tract | Because List and Hash are very different implementations.. in JavaScript they are (or at least were) the same (arrays were just numerically keyed hashes) | 12:52 | |
| But that’s never been the case in Raku | |||
| habere-et-disper | Thanks ab5tract | 13:07 | |
| ab5tract | Now, theoretically we could do something like define an AT-KEY in List that calls self.Hash.AT-KEY | 13:08 | |
| but that's probably a lot more complicated than it sounds at first | 13:09 | ||
| I believe that RakuAST and/or macros will make implementing this in user space relatively trivial | 13:10 | ||
|
15:12
habere-et-disper left
18:00
librasteve_ joined
|
|||
| tbrowder | habere-et-disper: if you are interested in the PDF version of a calendar let me know. i have paused active development at the momoent | 21:42 | |
| *moment, but my wife loves my old PostScript version so i will be working on it again soon. | 21:44 | ||