[perl #121940] [@LARRY] say True but False # should be 'True' (advent2010-day19)

[David Warring via RT]

The behavious still seems the same:

% perl6 --v
This is Rakudo version 2016.07.1-135-g77724b2 built on MoarVM version 
2016.07-16-g85b6537
implementing Perl 6.c.
% perl6 -e'my $s = False but True; say $s; say $s.so;'
True
True

This is inconsistent with:

% perl6 -e'my $s = 0 but True; say $s; say $s.so;'
0
True

On Tue Aug 09 08:23:37 2016, coke wrote:
> On Wed May 21 13:36:58 2014, david.warring wrote:
> > [08:09] <dwarring> r: my $value = True but False; say $value
> > [08:09] <+camelia> rakudo-jvm 196b4f: OUTPUT«(timeout)»
> > [08:09] <+camelia> ..rakudo-{parrot,moar} 196b4f: OUTPUT«False␤»
> > ...
> > [08:10] <masak> rakudo-jvm is all "WARNING. PARADOX. MUST OVERHEAT."
> > [08:11] * dwarring heh
> > ...
> > [08:11] <dwarring> I'll put in an rakudobug
> > ...
> > [08:18] <masak> dwarring: just be aware, camelia has been known to
> > timeout on rakudo-jvm.
> > [08:18] <masak> dwarring: so it might just be an artifact.
> > [08:21] <FROGGS> n: my $value = True but False; say $value
> > [08:21] <+camelia> niecza v24-109-g48a8de3: OUTPUT«True␤»
> > [08:21] <FROGGS> m: my $value = True but False; say $value
> > [08:21] <+camelia> rakudo-moar 196b4f: OUTPUT«False␤»
> > [08:21] <FROGGS> I guess it is about that
> > [08:22] <dwarring> this expects 'True' -
> > http://perl6advent.wordpress.com/2010/12/19/day-19-false-truth/
> > [08:24] <masak> I kind of expect True, too.
> > [08:24] == ajr_ [~quas...@96-44-210-169.ip.tor.radiant.net] has quit
> > [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
> > [08:25] <dwarring> r: my $value = True but False; say ?$value
> > [08:25] <+camelia> rakudo-{parrot,jvm,moar} 196b4f: OUTPUT«False␤»
> > [08:25] <masak> because the *value* is still True, kind of. it's just
> > the boolean aspect of it that has been overridden.
> > [08:25] <FROGGS> n: my $value = True but False; say ?$value
> > [08:25] <+camelia> niecza v24-109-g48a8de3: OUTPUT«False␤»
> > [08:25] <FROGGS> niecza++
> 
> This is from an old advent post that was pre-Christmas; is this
> actually a bug in current rakudo we should fix, or is the advent post
> out of date?