On 2021-02-24 rir <rir...@comcast.net> wrote:
> It is just an odd puzzle for me that "UnknownBareId KnownClassId"
> is accepted has the start of a valid statement. How would such
> a statement be completed?
Let's go through a few examples::
raku -e 'foo 1'
===SORRY!=== Error while compiling -e
Undeclared routine:
foo used at line 1
simple and clear error: syntax is correct, ``foo`` must be the name of
a sub, but it's never defined.
Closer to what you got::
raku -e 'foo 1 2'
===SORRY!=== Error while compiling -e
Two terms in a row
at -e:1
------> foo 1⏏ 2
expecting any of:
infix
infix stopper
postfix
statement end
statement modifier
statement modifier loop
notice the list of expected things. Did we mean ``foo 1 + 2``, ``foo
1, 2``, ``foo 1 if 2``?
Now for what you saw::
raku -e 'foo 1 { 2; }'
===SORRY!=== Error while compiling -e
Unexpected block in infix position (missing statement control word before the
expression?)
at -e:1
------> foo 1⏏ { 2; }
expecting any of:
infix
infix stopper
postfix
Again, did we mean ``foo 1 ~~ { 2; }``, ``foo 1, { 2; }``, ``foo 1 if
{ 2; }``?
In all these cases, ``foo`` is presumed to be the name of a sub,
because (I think) it's at the start of the statement, and it's not a
known keyword. Then the parser tries to make sense of the following
tokens, and gets confused.
So, to answer "How would such a statement be completed?":
* with an infix (a comma, any infix operator that can take (in your
case) a type and a block, …)
* I'm not sure what an "infix stopper" is
* a postfix (like ``if``, ``for``, ``with``…)
--
Dakkar - <Mobilis in mobile>
GPG public key fingerprint = A071 E618 DD2C 5901 9574
6FE2 40EA 9883 7519 3F88
key id = 0x75193F88
