On 8/12/06, Chad Perrin <perrin / apotheon.com> wrote:

> Something I've been wondering for a while, now . . .
>
> Is there any particular reason that the traditional approach seems to be
> to use %w{a b c} rather than %w[a b c] (the latter of which seems even
> more sparing of the fingers)?

Cause the bible done told us.  Or at least because that's what Dave,
or whoever wrote the examples in the Pickaxe used.

actually any of these should work:

%w(a b c)
%w<a b c>
%w.a b c.
%w*a b c*

The pickaxe says that %w1a b c1 should work but it doesn't, it should
say non-alphanumeric instead of nonalphabetic in the last pp on page
318.
-- 
Rick DeNatale

IPMS/USA Region 12 Coordinator
http://ipmsr12.denhaven2.com/

Visit the Project Mercury Wiki Site
http://www.mercuryspacecraft.com/