I think I found a Synopsis fossil, in light of revision 29931, but wanted to be sure ...

pugs-comm...@feather.perl6.nl wrote:
Author: lwall
Date: 2010-03-03 18:34:04 +0100 (Wed, 03 Mar 2010)
New Revision: 29931

[S02] remove 1/2 and +2-3i literal forms, now rely on angle dwimmery for 
or constant folding otherwise.
 Complex literals are similarly indicated by writing an addition or subtraction 
-two real numbers without spaces:
+two real numbers (again, without spaces around the operators) inside angles:
- 5.2+1e42i
-    3-1i
+    <5.2+1e42i>
+    < -3-1i >
As with rational literals, constant folding would produce the same
 complex number, but this form parses as a single term, ignoring
 surrounding precedence.

Basically, I found this line in Synopsis 2, in the section talking about 

    1+3\      i;

So the question is about whether this example should be kept as still valid code or whether it is now invalid and a fossil?

I suspect it *is* still valid, at least if this by itself:


... is a valid literal denoting <0+3i>, but wanted to check.

-- Darren Duncan

Reply via email to