On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 6:48 AM, Carl Mäsak <cma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> David (>), Moritz (>>), Aaron (>>>):
>>>> 2,3 constructs a list. 2..3 also constructs a list, unless it's in a
>>>> given/when condition in which case it's just a range.
>>>
>>> No. 2..3 is always a range. It's just list context that turns it into a
>>> list.
>>>
>>>> That seems confusing.
>>
>> It sounds like the split personality of Ranges strikes again. I still think
>> it makes more sense to have one Series-only type and one Range-only type,
>> rather than one Series type and one Range-plus-Series type.
>
> If for no other reason than to contribute a contrasting viewpoint, I'm
> not sure I see the problem in this case. A range is an object in Perl
> 6, in a much more palpable way than in Perl 5. This might be what
> causes the mental mismatch for Perl5-ers.
>
> As far as I can see, the range object already is of your proposed
> Range-plus-Series type, and when I apply list context to the range, I
> get your proposed Series-only type (which happens to be an ordinary
> list, but still).
The one thing that worries me about this is how :by fits into it all.
rakudo: given 1.5 { when 1..2 { say 'between one and two' }; say 'not'; };
p6eval rakudo 4b141a: OUTPUT«between one and two»
feels like it makes sense to me. But
rakudo: given 1.5 { when Range.new(from => 1, to => 2, by => 1/3) {
say 'between one and two' }; say 'not'; };
p6eval rakudo 4b141a: OUTPUT«between one and two»
makes me very leery. I know :by isn't actually implemented yet, but
what should it do here when it is?
--
Solomon Foster: colo...@gmail.com
HarmonyWare, Inc: http://www.harmonyware.com
