On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 03:09:20 -0700, jn...@jnthn.net wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:32:41 -0700, c...@zoffix.com wrote:
> I'm figuring this got filed because something depends on
> it
Yeah, it was found by Toaster as a regression in Concurrent::File::Find module.
Long live the Toaster \o/
On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 03:09:20 -0700, jn...@jnthn.net wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:32:41 -0700, c...@zoffix.com wrote:
> I'm figuring this got filed because something depends on
> it
Yeah, it was found by Toaster as a regression in Concurrent::File::Find module.
Long live the Toaster \o/
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:32:41 -0700, c...@zoffix.com wrote:
> This a two part report:
>
> 1) It appears in some cases a for loop doesn't sink stuff. Which
> causes, for example, a .map call to never be evaluated:
>
> m: sub foo($?) { ^2 .map: &say }; foo() for 1
> rakudo-moar c252b3: ( no output
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:32:41 -0700, c...@zoffix.com wrote:
> This a two part report:
>
> 1) It appears in some cases a for loop doesn't sink stuff. Which
> causes, for example, a .map call to never be evaluated:
>
> m: sub foo($?) { ^2 .map: &say }; foo() for 1
> rakudo-moar c252b3: ( no output
# New Ticket Created by Zoffix Znet
# Please include the string: [perl #131593]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=131593 >
This a two part report:
1) It appears in some cases a for loop doesn't sink stuff. Which
