"FOO" => "bar" # Replace FOO with bar
Unfortunately, despite empirical evidence to the contrary at the time, keys() does not guarantee sort-order results https://perldoc.perl.org/functions/keys.html
This worked for a while (appeared to work?) and but was subsequently caught by another developer, who added a sort().
(Get a templating library alreay yeesh).
Incidentally Ruby made the transition to sorted Hash some years ago (1.9 maybe?) and I don't remember any great fall-out.
> Hash entries are returned in an apparently random order. The actual random order is specific to a given hash; the exact same series of operations on two hashes may result in a different order for each hash.
Applying a `sort` to the output of `keys` is second nature to me - I'm always aware that hash entries are unordered in Perl.
Only possible downside might be performance (or memory). I recall the ruby maintainers ensuring they had an implementation with very little if any performance/memory implication.
For example, suppose you have a dictionary containing PriorityItem values. PriorityItems are sorted by priority, while the value only matters for equality (affects __eq__ but not __lt__). If you have a dictionary whose values are PriorityItems and you say `sorted(dictionary.values())` the order of the output could vary w.r.t. equal priority items. So if you wrote a test asserting a process hiding a dictionary had a stable ordering of the items, it might consistently pass by accident on your machine and then fail elsewhere.