[perl #131490] Crash in Junction:D.BUILDALL `This type (Scalar) does not support elems`

2017-09-30 Thread Sam S. via RT 
On Sat, 30 Sep 2017 13:13:31 -0700, c...@zoffix.com wrote:
> Don't see a reason why not.

Well, passing a 'type' string parameter to select between what is essentially 
different object sub-types, seems internal-ish.

I can't think of anything else in the public Perl 6 API which does this; a more 
Perl 6'ish API would dispatch based on *different* named parameters, or simply 
make the object sub-types available as separate subclasses.

So it might make sense to consider `Junction.new` as "not public API" for now, 
until this is ironed out.

> If it weren't, all fixed bugs still need a test to cover them.

Noted; Marking the ticket as TESTNEEDED.

A test for the current behavior could look like:

use Test;
throws-like { Junction.new }, X::Multi::NoMatch, "Junction.new with no 
arguments";

[perl #131490] Crash in Junction:D.BUILDALL `This type (Scalar) does not support elems`

2017-09-30 Thread Zoffix Znet via RT 
On Sat, 30 Sep 2017 12:28:48 -0700, sml...@gmail.com wrote:
> Is `Junction.new` meant to be public API?

Don't see a reason why not.

> If not, do we still need a test for this?

If it weren't, all fixed bugs still need a test to cover them. If the test 
should
not become part of the spec, it should be placed into rakudo's test suite 
instead.


> ---
> [1] https://gist.github.com/Whateverable/13556140482322fd5bf4080092a1d284
> [2] https://github.com/rakudo/rakudo/commit/61ecfd511

[perl #131490] Crash in Junction:D.BUILDALL `This type (Scalar) does not support elems`

2017-09-30 Thread Zoffix Znet via RT 
On Sat, 30 Sep 2017 12:28:48 -0700, sml...@gmail.com wrote:
> Is `Junction.new` meant to be public API?

Don't see a reason why not.

> If not, do we still need a test for this?

If it weren't, all fixed bugs still need a test to cover them. If the test 
should
not become part of the spec, it should be placed into rakudo's test suite 
instead.


> ---
> [1] https://gist.github.com/Whateverable/13556140482322fd5bf4080092a1d284
> [2] https://github.com/rakudo/rakudo/commit/61ecfd511

[perl #131490] Crash in Junction:D.BUILDALL `This type (Scalar) does not support elems`

2017-09-30 Thread Sam S. via RT 
On Fri, 02 Jun 2017 18:58:22 -0700, c...@zoffix.com wrote:
> While chasing some other bugs, came across this one:
> 
>  m: Junction.new.BUILDALL: {}
>  rakudo-moar ef9872: OUTPUT: «This type (Scalar) does not
> support elems␤  in block  at  line 1␤␤»
> 
> Not sure how much it matters in itself, but figured I'd report it, in
> case it's a symptom of a bigger bug.

This can be golfed to just:

Junction.new;

And it has been fixed to throw a better error message now:

➜  Junction.new;
Cannot resolve caller new(Junction: ); none of these signatures match:
(Junction $: \values, Str :$type!, *%_)
(Junction $: Str:D \type, \values, *%_)

According to bisectable¹, it was fixed by a commit² in June.

The 'bigger issue' was possibly RT #131395.

Is `Junction.new` meant to be public API?
If not, do we still need a test for this?

---
[1] https://gist.github.com/Whateverable/13556140482322fd5bf4080092a1d284
[2] https://github.com/rakudo/rakudo/commit/61ecfd511

[perl #131490] Crash in Junction:D.BUILDALL `This type (Scalar) does not support elems`

2017-06-02 Thread via RT 
# New Ticket Created by  Zoffix Znet 
# Please include the string:  [perl #131490]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. 
# https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=131490 >


While chasing some other bugs, came across this one:

 m: Junction.new.BUILDALL: {}
 rakudo-moar ef9872: OUTPUT: «This type (Scalar) does not support 
elems␤  in block  at  line 1␤␤»

Not sure how much it matters in itself, but figured I'd report it, in case it's 
a symptom of a bigger bug.