On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Elizabeth Mattijsen <l...@dijkmat.nl> wrote: > “with” is completely agnostic about what it is working on. It merely checks > for definedness and sets the topicalizer if so.
Hmm- what's the benefit of with's defined check? Seems like it makes
"with" break if used with type objects.
> $_ = Complex; say .does(Numeric)
True
> with Complex { say .does(Numeric) }
()
-y
