Still reproducible (2017.11,HEAD(e5b660e)) I don't know if it's NYI or @LARRY. I'd put LARRY first, and then one of the LARRYs can turn it into a NYI.
On 2015-08-05 15:25:57, barto...@gmx.de wrote: > The relevant sentences from the design docs (S06, introduced with > commit 7846594ee4): > > "Since this option [is rw] forces an argument to be required, it > cannot coexist with the ? mark to make an argument optional. (It may, > however, be used with = indicating a default, but only if the default > expression represents something that is nameable at compile time and > that can bind as an lvalue, such as CALLER::<$/> or OUTER::<$_>.)" > > AFAIU the default value in question (= 60) does not qualify as a valid > "is rw"-able expression according to S06. > > Rakudo makes no difference between parameters made optional with the ? > mark or those made optional by providing a default value and simply > disallows 'is rw' (introduced with commit 45c44bafbf), e.g.: > > $ perl6 -e 'sub f($x is rw = OUTER::<$_>) {$x++; say $x}; $_ = 41; f' > ===SORRY!=== Error while compiling -e > Cannot use 'is rw' on an optional parameter > at -e:1