# New Ticket Created by Moritz Lenz
# Please include the string: [perl #121531]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=121531 >
This test from S04-phasers/pre-post.t fails on rakudo-moar, but passes
on the two other ba
# New Ticket Created by Moritz Lenz
# Please include the string: [perl #121530]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=121530 >
S04-phasers/enter-leave.t has this test:
my $str;
try {
LEAVE { $str ~= '
On 03/28/2014 07:13 PM, Siddhant Saraf wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I used to be unable to build nqp-p a month ago or so. Recently, that
> changed, and now parrot + nqp-p builds fine. (rakudo doens't build
> yet, but that is another email)
>
> Now I want to find out which commit fixed things for me. I k
Hello,
I used to be unable to build nqp-p a month ago or so. Recently, that
changed, and now parrot + nqp-p builds fine. (rakudo doens't build
yet, but that is another email)
Now I want to find out which commit fixed things for me. I know how to
use git-bisect on a single repo to find the commit
# New Ticket Created by Moritz Lenz
# Please include the string: [perl #121528]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=121528 >
r: say $*EXECUTABLE_NAME
rakudo-jvm 3699aa: OUTPUT«perl6-j»
..rakudo-parrot 3699aa: OU
# New Ticket Created by Moritz Lenz
# Please include the string: [perl #121527]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=121527 >
r: say 301281685344656669
rakudo-parrot 3699aa, rakudo-jvm 3699aa:
OUTPUT«3012
On 03/28/2014 02:28 PM, Parrot Raiser wrote:
> On 3/27/14, Moritz Lenz wrote:
>
>> Agreed. We "just" need to come up with a consistent, intuitive way to
>> handle the rest of the cases. And implement it.
>>
>
> Whenever somebody offers a solution to a problem formulated as "We
> just need to .
On 3/27/14, Moritz Lenz wrote:
> Agreed. We "just" need to come up with a consistent, intuitive way to
> handle the rest of the cases. And implement it.
>
Whenever somebody offers a solution to a problem formulated as "We
just need to " (or "why don't you just?"), it's usually a sign
tha
