# New Ticket Created by "Carl Mäsak"
# Please include the string: [perl #63770]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# <URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=63770 >
<ruoso> hmm
<ruoso> something's wrong there
<ruoso> rakudo: class A { method a { { .say } }; method foo { $.a(1);
$.a.(2) } }; my $a = A.new; $a.foo
<p6eval> rakudo 95ce39: OUTPUT«Use of uninitialized valueinvoke()
not implemented in class 'Integer [...]
<ruoso> there it is...
<ruoso> rakudo is making something wrong
<masak> what just happened? :)
<moritz_> uhm
<masak> how can that even dispatch?
<ruoso> rakudo is probably assuming something because of "has $.a"
<moritz_> method a { { .say } }
<moritz_> that's supposed to return a closure, right?
<ruoso> yes
* masak submits rakudobug
<ruoso> $.a(1) sends (1) as argument to method a
<ruoso> $.a.(1) expects the return of a to be a callable, and then
send 1 as an argument to that
* SamB pretends not to understand the difference ;-P
<ruoso> masak, and btw...
<ruoso> there is *always* a method involved
<masak> ruoso: no, $.a.(1) is the same as $.a(1)
<ruoso> unless you use $!a
<masak> ruoso: right.
<ruoso> masak, so, if method a accepts an argument, how do you send it?
<masak> ruoso: you're assuming that $.a.(1) makes two calls, one to a
and one to its returned closure. I don't see why you assume that.
<ruoso> because of the two dots
<masak> ruoso: but .() and () are equivalent, no?
<moritz_> unless where they are not :-)
<SamB> masak: isn't that what the entire discussion has been about ?
<masak> SamB: yes.
<masak> we're starting in on the second lap round the circle now.
<ruoso> masak, .() and () are equivalent when you're dealing with variables
<moritz_> I think it would DWIM to make $.a.() being the same as $.a().a()
<ruoso> $foo() and $foo.() are the same
<moritz_> but I have no idea if it's specced that way
* masak gives up
<masak> we're evidently on uncharted territory here
<masak> I'm pasting this whole discussion into the rakudobug
