Re: Is this the correct behaviour

2005-04-26 Thread Aaron Sherman
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 13:46 +0530, Kiran Kumar wrote: > I Dont think this is fixed , Im still getting this Error . > > for (0 .. 8) -> $tmp > { > say " tmp is $tmp Spcl is $_ \n"; > } Interesting. Now, it's dependent on the use of $_. Take out that $_ and it works fine... cool bug ;-)

Re: Is this the correct behaviour

2005-04-26 Thread Kiran Kumar
I Dont think this is fixed , Im still getting this Error . for (0 .. 8) -> $tmp { say " tmp is $tmp Spcl is $_ \n"; } On 4/26/05, Aaron Sherman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 08:43, Luke Palmer wrote: > > > Nope. It seems that pugs is considering $tmp and the implic

Re: Is this the correct behaviour

2005-04-25 Thread Aaron Sherman
On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 08:43, Luke Palmer wrote: > Nope. It seems that pugs is considering $tmp and the implicit usage of > $_ to specify two different parameters to the block. In fact, there's > only one: $tmp, and it is aliased to $_. Ah, and this was my problem too. Thanks, Luke or whoever fi

Re: Is this the correct behaviour

2005-04-25 Thread Luke Palmer
Kiran Kumar writes: > Hi , > Is this behaviour correct when i print $_ ? .. > > > #!/usr/bin/pugs > use v6; > > for (0 .. 8) -> $tmp > { > say " tmp is $tmp Spcl is $_ \n"; > } > > tmp is 0 Spcl is 1 > > tmp is 2 Spcl is 3 > > tmp is 4 Spcl is 5 > > tmp is 6 Spcl is 7 > > tm