From: Robert Klemme <bob.news@...>
Date: 2004-09-04T19:30:15+09:00
Subject: Re: OK... :) question about hash and array literals


"Hal Fulton" <hal9000@hypermetrics.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:41393C84.9090002@hypermetrics.com...
> It has always bothered me a little that [...] and {...} do not
> call Array.new and Hash.new respectively.
>
> I assume this is handled closer to parse time, for speed?
>
> Is there a method that does get called (I think not), or could
> in theory such a thing be implemented?
>
> Example:
>
>    class Hash
>      def Hash.literal(*pairs)
>        pairs.each do |pair|
>          k, v = pair
>          puts "Adding key #{k}, value #{v}"
>        end
>        super  # or whatever
>      end
>    end
>
>    x = {1=>2, 3=>4}    # Output: Adding key 1, value 2
>                        #         Adding key 3, value 4
>
> And yes, this is related again to my wanting an ordered arbitrarily
> indexable collection with a convenient literal notation.

Even if a ordered map would be added you would not want to change literals
default behavior.  Too much code depends on this.  I remember, we had a
similar discussion with String literals a while ago.  See also my post in
the other thread.

Kind regards

    robert