On Thursday 23 November 2006 08:48, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> Here's a more detailed use case of why the current semantics
> aren't useful. For subroutine calls, PAST-pm tries to pass
> constants directly to subroutines (when it can) rather than
> creating temporary PMCs and passing those. For
On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 11:20:58PM +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 22. November 2006 21:03 schrieb Leopold Toetsch:
> > Am Mittwoch, 22. November 2006 18:03 schrieb Patrick R.Michaud:
> > > Is this a bug (I think it is), or does the underscore in
> > >
> > > :multi mean something other
Am Mittwoch, 22. November 2006 21:03 schrieb Leopold Toetsch:
> Am Mittwoch, 22. November 2006 18:03 schrieb Patrick R.Michaud:
> > Is this a bug (I think it is), or does the underscore in
> >
> > :multi mean something other than "any argument"?
>
> The meaning is 'any PMC' [1], and it of course ca
Am Mittwoch, 22. November 2006 18:03 schrieb Patrick R.Michaud:
> Is this a bug (I think it is), or does the underscore in
>
> :multi mean something other than "any argument"?
The meaning is 'any PMC' [1], and it of course can't be a bug as there are no
specs ;)
leo
[1] multi_type:
compilers/i
# New Ticket Created by Patrick R. Michaud
# Please include the string: [perl #40968]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=40968 >
I'm filing this as a bug report, but it could just be that
I don't understand how
