David Green wrote:
> I bet we actually don't disagree much; I'm not really against "ro" --
> I'm just not against "readonly" because of its length. If I were
> writing casually, I'd use "rw" and "ro"; formally, I'd use "read only"
> and "read/write" (or even "readable and writable"). At an in-bet
Lines 46-52 of t/spec/S02-literals/pairs.t claims that
the colonpair notation should produce a Bool instead of
an Int:
#?rakudo todo 'Adverbial pairs without should produce a Bool (not Int)'
is f2(:a), "Bool", "':a' is a named";
#?rakudo todo '.() sub calls'
is(f2.(:a),
If someone wants to make the final word on what the behavior should be
I can go ahead and implement it.
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 11:41 PM, Jonathan Scott Duff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 9:38 AM, TSa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> HaloO,
>> Moritz Lenz wrote:
>>
>>> In Per
