On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 04:54:10AM -0700, Moritz Lenz via RT wrote:
> On Wed Apr 08 14:59:19 2009, moritz wrote:
> > 23:55 <@moritz_> rakudo: my @a = 1..4; say @a[1..*].perl
> > 23:56 < p6eval> rakudo 6b9755: OUTPUT«[2, 3, 4, undef]»
> >
> > It should just be [2, 3, 4].
>
> Since the discussion
David Green wrote:
> Jon Lang wrote:
>> Given that it's relatively easy to say "1..^*", I wouldn't mind
>> standardizing this so that '*' always refers to the element just past
>> the last one, at least when dealing with the standard index.
>
> I like the DWIMmery, but the more I think about it, fo
On 2009-Aug-19, at 8:07 am, Jon Lang wrote:
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 5:37 AM, Jan Ingvoldstad
wrote:
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Moritz Lenz via RT > wrote:
It doesn't mention how the postcifcumfix:<[ ]> is supposed to
introspect
those to find out if the WhateverCode object constructed by
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 5:37 AM, Jan Ingvoldstad wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Moritz Lenz via RT <
> perl6-bugs-follo...@perl.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> Since the discussion came up on #perl6 if this is really the expected
>> behaviour, S09 says:
>>
>> As the end-point of a range, a lone "wha
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Moritz Lenz via RT <
perl6-bugs-follo...@perl.org> wrote:
>
> Since the discussion came up on #perl6 if this is really the expected
> behaviour, S09 says:
>
> As the end-point of a range, a lone "whatever" means "to the maximum
> specified index" (if fixed indices
