Still reproducible (2017.11, HEAD(5929887))
On 2015-02-01 11:48:18, masak wrote: > <masak> m: sub &foo() {}; say "alive" > <camelia> rakudo-moar 6e182d: OUTPUT«===SORRY!=== Error while > compiling /tmp/GE7JBiJGWPMissing blockat ------> sub ⏏&foo() {}; say > "alive" expecting any of: new name to be defined» > <masak> (a) I'm wondering if this shouldn't be allowed, and mean the > same as `sub foo` > <masak> (b) the error message is LTA, but I don't have any good ideas > for what it ought to be > <raydiak> wrt (b), maybe "invalid sub name" or "invalid character in > sub name" or along those lines? perhaps additionally a specific > mention of no leading '&' if that's the first char it saw in the name? > <raydiak> I guess it'll be the same message we see when botching the > body of an anonymous sub too, though... > * raydiak wouldn't mind allowing a leading &, either, but the message > will still be LTA in other cases > <masak> troo > * masak submits rakudobug