On: TOML, Tom's Own Markup Language

[markov_twain]

This bit of ruby should take care of it

    HashMap = HashTable = Map = Table = Dictionary = Hash

And if you're feeling adventurous,

    Object.send :remove_const, :Hash

[agscala → markov_twain]

Please never, ever do this

[DanWaterworth → agscala]

If doing this is such a bad idea then why is it so easy?

[jlgreco → DanWaterworth]

If doing:

  #define BEGIN {
  #define END }

were such a bad idea, then why is it so easy?

[DanWaterworth → jlgreco]

Maybe the language is poorly designed.

[jlgreco → DanWaterworth]

Or maybe the connection between being able to do something and it being a good idea to do something is just in your head.

[DanWaterworth → jlgreco]

In my experience, making obviously bad things difficult or impossible improves reliability. This idea certainly resides within my cranial cavity, but that doesn't necessarily make it wrong.

[jlgreco → DanWaterworth]

How could:

  HashMap = HashTable = Map = Table = Dictionary = Hash

possibly not qualify as "obviously bad"? The only reason you've offered up is because it is easy...

[DanWaterworth → jlgreco]

I think this is fine. The obviously bad part is being able to remove/change constants, especially as these changes are global.

[agscala → DanWaterworth]

The obviously bad part is that you pollute the global namespace for no reason other than laziness. When someone comes across code that uses a "Table" object interchangeably with "Dictionary" and "Hash", then he's going to have to look through the source code to find this bizarre line only to find out that you renamed a built-in container for no good reason.

[DanWaterworth → agscala]

Yes, I suppose that's also true.

[knewter → markov_twain]

I approve of this. Don't listen to that other guy. This should be standard.

One addition though:

    Cocktionary = HashMap

"Dictionary" never really made sense.