From: "alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov)" Date: 2012-04-29T22:00:28+09:00 Subject: [ruby-core:44756] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6375] Python notation for literal Hash Issue #6375 has been updated by alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov). Ok. However, i was not proposing to remove the 1.9 syntax: { a: 'b' } could be a shorthand notation for { :a: 'b' }, like "#@x #@y" is a shorthand notation for "#{@x} #{@y}". Alexey. ---------------------------------------- Feature #6375: Python notation for literal Hash https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6375#change-26317 Author: alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov) Status: Rejected Priority: Low Assignee: Category: core Target version: Is there a reason not to use Python notation for literal Hash as an alternative to Ruby notation? I would like to be able to write either { 'a' => 'b', 'c' => 'd' } or { 'a' : 'b', 'c' : 'd' }, and either { :a => 'b' } or { :a: 'b' } . I find { a: 'b' } to be a confusing alternative to { :a => 'b' }, and do not use it because of this (because it cannot be used if the key is not a symbol). -- http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/