> On 8 Dec 2017, at 19:21, Zoffix Znet via RT <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 08 Dec 2017 08:28:32 -0800, comdog wrote:
>> This comes from an answer to a Perl 6 question on Stackoverflow that
>> showed a different bug:
>>
>> https://stackoverflow.com/q/45527881/2766176
>>
>> With put() it does not and gives a strange error:
>
> I guess jnthn++ gets a score point for predicting[^1] this would happen:
>
> <jnthn> Hmmm...not too keen on the Junction.Str patch
> <jnthn> Anything that (quite reasonably) does nqp::unbox_s($foo.Str) is now
> going to (quite rightly) explode
> <timotimo> clearly we have to build UNBOXABLE_STR :)
> <jnthn> No, it can just explode, and then I'll point people at this
> commit. :P
Which would be me.
And as far as I recall atm, that was in response to making:
$ 6 'dd "foo" ~ any(1,3,5) ~ "bar"'
any("foo1bar", "foo3bar", "foo5bar”)
work. If that shouldn’t work, or work differently, it can be ripped out /
replaced. If that should work, then we need to look at fixing -put-.
> If put() were made to work here, I'd expect it to junct and be equivalent to
> `put 1`, `put 3`, `put 7` executed in random order, but the OP in that SO has
> an entirely different expectation.
FWIW, I would also expect it to junct.
