Dave Whipp wrote:
> To squint at this slightly, in the context that we already have 0...1e10
> as a sequence generator, perhaps the semantics of iterating a range
> should be unordered -- that is,
>
> for 0..10 -> $x { ... }
>
> is treated as
>
> for (0...10).pick(*) -> $x { ... }Sorry, I have to ask. Are you serious? Really? Cheers, Moritz
