Re: Is this a bug?

2016-09-19 Thread Aaron Sherman
Thank you. Silly me, thinking "this is so simple I don't need to run it through the command-line to test it." :-) Anway, yeah, say $_ for reverse lines Aaron Sherman, M.: P: 617-440-4332 Google Talk, Email and Google Plus: a...@ajs.com Toolsmith, developer, gamer and life-long student.

Re: Is this a bug?

2016-09-19 Thread Parrot Raiser
It may make it clearer if I explain the broader objective. I'm trying to learn P6 thoroughly by developing training courses to teach it from scratch. (Fans of Gerald Weinberg may recognise the idea.) Obviously, while doing so, I want to explore pathological cases, both to clarify the concepts and

Re: Is this a bug?

2016-09-19 Thread Timo Paulssen
On 19/09/16 16:02, Aaron Sherman wrote: > I'm guessing that what you meant was "say as a function was what I > meant to > use there." In which case: > > say for reverse lines > > or > > for reverse lines { say } > > These are both valid ways of asking for each element of the iterable > thing

Re: Is this a bug?

2016-09-19 Thread Aaron Sherman
I'm guessing that what you meant was "say as a function was what I meant to use there." In which case: say for reverse lines or for reverse lines { say } These are both valid ways of asking for each element of the iterable thing returned from lines to be printed with a newline. But remember

Re: Is this a bug?

2016-09-18 Thread Trey Harris
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 16:49 Parrot Raiser <1parr...@gmail.com> wrote: say { $_ } was the correct thing to use there. (I'm trying to avoid > any mention of O-O for the moment.) > “Trying to avoid any mention of O-O” seems like a Perl 6 obfuscation or golf constraint, not a desirable development

Re: Is this a bug?

2016-09-18 Thread Brandon Allbery
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 4:49 PM, Parrot Raiser <1parr...@gmail.com> wrote: > What is this -> ;; $_? is raw { #`(Block|170303864) … } output? It's the gist of a Block, which is what you asked for when you did a `say` on an executable block. Why do you believe `say { $_ }` is the right thing

Re: Is this a bug?

2016-09-18 Thread Elizabeth Mattijsen
It is the .perl representation of a Block. > On 18 Sep 2016, at 22:49, Parrot Raiser <1parr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > say { $_ } was the correct thing to use there. (I'm trying to avoid > any mention of O-O for the moment.) > say {} was a "what happens if I do this" exercise. > > What is this

Re: Is this a bug?

2016-09-18 Thread Brent Laabs
Remember you can call a block with parentheses: > say { 11 + 31 }; -> ;; $_? is raw { #`(Block|140268472711224) ... } > say { 11 + 31 }(); 42 On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 12:58 PM, Elizabeth Mattijsen wrote: > I think you want: > > .say for reverse lines; > > not sure what you

Re: Is this a bug?

2016-09-18 Thread Elizabeth Mattijsen
I think you want: .say for reverse lines; not sure what you are trying to achieve otherwise, but: say { } producing something like -> ;; $_? is raw { #`(Block|170303864) … } feels entirely correct to me. :-) Liz > On 18 Sep 2016, at 21:52, Parrot Raiser <1parr...@gmail.com>