Isak wrote:
> 
> I don't think 'ordered' is a good name for something sorted by 
> _insertion order_.

The fact that something can be "sorted" at all is only because it
has an order, i.e., is sequential.

In fact, I would say an "ordered hash" would be subject to being
sorted just as an array is. (We can sort an array because it has
an order -- first element, second element, and so on. We can "sort"
a regular hash, but we get an array back.)

> I am probably 'tainted' by my exposure to the Java API, but just like I 
> expect an ordered tree to be sorted by value, I'd expect an ordered map 
> to be sorted by key.
> 
> Insertion order maps are very useful too, and I'd love to see both added 
> to the Ruby stdlib. I(o?)Hash and OHash? Let's keep Hash as lean and 
> mean as possible.

That seems reasonable to me.

I once proposed the name "Map" for such a class -- there was some reason
this wasn't considered good, but I can't recall why.


Hal