From: "matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)" <matz@...>
Date: 2012-04-29T22:57:26+09:00
Subject: [ruby-core:44757] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6375] Python notation for literal Hash


Issue #6375 has been updated by matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto).


And repeating myself, when {a: 'b'} is a shorthand for {:a => 'b'},
naturally {'a': 'b'} should be {:'a' => 'b'} that is another form of
{:a => 'b'} in Ruby.

Matz.
----------------------------------------
Feature #6375: Python notation for literal Hash
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6375#change-26318

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/