On 8/22/06, Austin Ziegler <halostatue / gmail.com> wrote:
> But Hashes are, as has been
> repeated many times, an unordered collection. Imposing order on a Hash
> (even insertion order) changes the type of collection that it is --
> even if it's useful, which I have already granted. (Of course, I would
> need to -- since I've implemented one myself for PDF::Writer.)

If you define hash like that, sure. But I would say hashes aren't
defined as being unordered it's just that no order is usually defined
or enforced. I'd define a hash as something that maps keys to values
using a hash function. An OrderedHash can still be a subclass of Hash
since it upholds the Liskov substitution principle and is thus still a
hash.

But this is just semantics and doesn't really matter.

Pedro.