On Tue Apr 03 22:38:13 2012, moritz wrote: > > > On 04/03/2012 11:16 PM, Patrick R. Michaud wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:22:11PM +0200, Moritz Lenz wrote: > >> On 04/03/2012 06:44 PM, Patrick R. Michaud via RT wrote: > >> > On Tue Apr 03 01:24:47 2012, moritz wrote: > >> >> 10:23 < timotimo> r: say "foo"[1..*] > >> >> 10:23 <+p6eval> rakudo 8ead1e: OUTPUT«Method 'gimme' not found for > >> >> invocant of > >> >> class 'Str' in method postcircumfix:<[ ]> at > >> >> src/gen/CORE.setting:1147 in block <anon> at > >> >> /tmp/1ZiRf7yMZW:1» > >> > > >> > > >> > Now fixed in 1bbf9eb, needs spectests to close ticket. > >> > >> Now we have "foo"[2] fail(), but "foo"[2..*] returns the empty Parcel. > >> Is that the intended behavior? > > > > Since "foo" acts like a list of one element, > > My point is that it currently doesn't really. > > Compare: > > say "foo".list.[2] # Nil > > with > > say "foo".[2] # Index out of range. Is: 2, should be in 0..0 > > which is why I'm complaining about inconsistencies. > > > I suspect that .[2..*] > > should act the same as when used on an array of one element, which > > results in an empty Parcel: > > > > my @array = "foo"; > > say @array[2..*].elems; # 0 > > say "foo"[2..*].elems; # 0 > > > > If that's wrong, we need better spectests to get the correct > > behavior. > > No, first we need agreement on what the right behavior is. Thinking > about spectests before we're positive on the right behavior is taking > things out of order. >
Looks like there is already a spec test in S02-types/lists.t Removing testneeded tag, but it sounds like we need to answer the question about what the right behavior is before we can keep that test and close the ticket. -- Will "Coke" Coleda
