Wrt your second problem, if this
> $arg_for<array> = [ ( 0 .. $arg_for<count> ) »*« $arg_for<scale> ]; 
is not rw so is not actually adding the entry to the hash (btw,
shouldn't the >>*<< be >>* as the right-hand operand is a scalar?), then
it is possible that
> > > And then I get an error telling me 'No such method in class
> > > Scalar: "&kv"' in the line 
> > > 
> > > for %buckets<w><array>.kv -> $i, $w {
means that %buckets<w><array> is being autovivisected (or whatever you
call it) as a Scalar element of %buckets<w>, rather than being a hash?

Just a thought. I was under the impression that writing to an argument
that is not rw should generate an error, unless it is copy, in which
case it should do what it seems to be doing. It's possible that Pugs has
not (yet) implemented this exactly, though.

You can't run away  forever,  but there's  nothing wrong with  getting a
good head start.  You want to shut out the night,  you want to shut down
the  sun,  you  want  to  shut  away  the  pieces  of  a  broken  heart.
`Rock and Roll Dreams Come True' (Steinman)    http://surreal.istic.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to