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