# New Ticket Created by "Carl Mäsak"
# Please include the string: [perl #95970]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# <URL: https://rt.perl.org:443/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=95970 >
<masak> is there a method for invoking a Routine? besides
postcircumfix:<( )>, I mean?
<jnthn> rakudo: sub foo($a) { say $a }; &foo.callwith(42)
<p6eval> rakudo 922500: OUTPUT«42»
<jnthn> That's what I thought when I saw .callwith :)
<masak> oh, interesting, .callwith without being in a call already :)
<moritz> why do you need anything besides .() ?
<masak> moritz: I don't, I'm just thinking ahead :)
<jnthn> Code.callwith(...) has no relation to callwith(...)
<masak> oh!
<masak> that's... unfortunate...
<jnthn> I dunno if the first is even tested, fwiw.
<jnthn> I guess if we have it it's spec
<jnthn> But it seems kinda...well...pointless.
<masak> hm, yes. S06:1146 mentions something of the sort.
<masak> "Use of C<callwith> allows the routine to be called without
introducing an official C<CALLER> frame."
<masak> that seems to be why.
<masak> should've been named .gotowith :P
<jnthn> oh
<jnthn> well, we don't do that. :)
* masak submits rakudobug
* jnthn doesn't bother re-adding it to nom :)
<moritz> masak: use callframe() to prove it :-)
<masak> rakudo: sub foo { my $foo; &bar.callwith() }; sub bar { my
$bar; say callframe.my }; foo
<p6eval> rakudo 922500: OUTPUT«$bar [...]
<masak> that's good enough.
* masak adds that to the ticket
