David (>), Moritz (>>), Aaron (>>>): >>> 2,3 constructs a list. 2..3 also constructs a list, unless it's in a >>> given/when condition in which case it's just a range. >> >> No. 2..3 is always a range. It's just list context that turns it into a >> list. >> >>> That seems confusing. > > It sounds like the split personality of Ranges strikes again. I still think > it makes more sense to have one Series-only type and one Range-only type, > rather than one Series type and one Range-plus-Series type.
If for no other reason than to contribute a contrasting viewpoint, I'm not sure I see the problem in this case. A range is an object in Perl 6, in a much more palpable way than in Perl 5. This might be what causes the mental mismatch for Perl5-ers. As far as I can see, the range object already is of your proposed Range-plus-Series type, and when I apply list context to the range, I get your proposed Series-only type (which happens to be an ordinary list, but still). // Carl
