Is it possible to signal to the error handler that it is talking about a
value somewhere instead of the program source, at least? Even if you can't
reasonably say what value where?
On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Aleks-Daniel Jakimenko-Aleksejev via RT <
perl6-bugs-follo...@perl.org> wrote:
>
Is it possible to signal to the error handler that it is talking about a
value somewhere instead of the program source, at least? Even if you can't
reasonably say what value where?
On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Aleks-Daniel Jakimenko-Aleksejev via RT <
perl6-bugs-follo...@perl.org> wrote:
>
“Couldn't the confusing wording be fixed without additional information?”
Yes. But how? We can't *remove* this hint because sometimes it is super useful.
On 2017-10-06 11:13:34, sml...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Oct 2017 22:10:22 -0700, alex.jakime...@gmail.com wrote:
> > To produce an error
On Wed, 04 Oct 2017 22:10:22 -0700, alex.jakime...@gmail.com wrote:
> To produce an error message that is more precise we'll need more
> information
> than just a line number, but we don't have that during the run time.
Couldn't the confusing wording be fixed without additional information?
As I
As far as I know, this ticket is impossible to resolve. At least not with what
we have now in rakudo.
To produce an error message that is more precise we'll need more information
than just a line number, but we don't have that during the run time.
See
# New Ticket Created by Alex Jakimenko
# Please include the string: [perl #126757]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=126757 >
Code:
say (33..126 .pick.chr);
Result:
Cannot convert string to number: base-10
This error occurs because 126.pick gives 126, 126.chr is "~". Then the
.. operator tries to numify its RHS, which is "~". That goes wrong, of
course.
So this is just a precedence problem with ranges.
Do you have a better suggestion for the error message here? Otherwise
i'd close this as
Thanks! Indeed! I should have tried understanding the issue and golfing it
down myself.
So the snippet can be golfed down to:
say +126.chr
The bug is still there, please don't close. In fact, the title is very
precise.
“126.chr” is still “126.chr”. It is less than awesome to whine about some
