On 04/03/2012 11:16 PM, Patrick R. Michaud wrote: > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:22:11PM +0200, Moritz Lenz wrote: >> On 04/03/2012 06:44 PM, Patrick R. Michaud via RT wrote: >> > On Tue Apr 03 01:24:47 2012, moritz wrote: >> >> 10:23 < timotimo> r: say "foo"[1..*] >> >> 10:23 <+p6eval> rakudo 8ead1e: OUTPUT«Method 'gimme' not found for >> >> invocant of >> >> class 'Str' in method postcircumfix:<[ ]> at >> >> src/gen/CORE.setting:1147 in block <anon> at >> >> /tmp/1ZiRf7yMZW:1» >> > >> > >> > Now fixed in 1bbf9eb, needs spectests to close ticket. >> >> Now we have "foo"[2] fail(), but "foo"[2..*] returns the empty Parcel. >> Is that the intended behavior? > > Since "foo" acts like a list of one element,
My point is that it currently doesn't really. Compare: say "foo".list.[2] # Nil with say "foo".[2] # Index out of range. Is: 2, should be in 0..0 which is why I'm complaining about inconsistencies. > I suspect that .[2..*] > should act the same as when used on an array of one element, which > results in an empty Parcel: > > my @array = "foo"; > say @array[2..*].elems; # 0 > say "foo"[2..*].elems; # 0 > > If that's wrong, we need better spectests to get the correct > behavior. No, first we need agreement on what the right behavior is. Thinking about spectests before we're positive on the right behavior is taking things out of order.
