On Thu Aug 21 13:12:32 2014, coke wrote:
> On Thu Jun 07 13:07:46 2012, kristofbogae...@gmail.com wrote:
> > p6: sub s_s(*%n) { %n>>.say }; s_s(|{:assoc<list>}, :assoc<left>); #
> > which one is correct?
> > rakudo e75a0a: OUTPUT«duplicate named argument in call in block
> > <anon> at /tmp/ohG08nWXj0:1»
> > niecza v18-6-ge52d6c3: OUTPUT«left» 21:54:05
> >
> > p6: sub s_s(*%n) { %n>>.say }; s_s(:assoc<list>, :assoc<left>);
> > rakudo e75a0a, niecza v18-6-ge52d6c3: OUTPUT«left»
> >
> > jnthn:
> > Rakudo has inconsistent behavior in that areas.
> > For non-flattened nameds it filters out the dupes
> > Flattened ones it can't do that, and Parrot barfs on dupe named args.
>
> 16:11 < [Coke]> p6: sub s_s(*%n) { %n>>.say }; s_s(|{:assoc<list>},
> :assoc<left>);
> 16:11 <+camelia> rakudo-jvm bc6a32: OUTPUT«(timeout)»
> 16:11 <+camelia> ..niecza v24-109-g48a8de3: OUTPUT«left»
> 16:11 <+camelia> ..rakudo-parrot bc6a32: OUTPUT«duplicate named argument in
> call in block at /tmp/tmpfile:1»
> 16:11 <+camelia> ..rakudo-moar bc6a32: OUTPUT«list»
> 16:12 < [Coke]> ... wow, it's getting worse.
Looks better, but I think we need jvm & moar to agree here.
06:12 < [Coke]> r: sub s_s(*%n) { %n>>.say };
s_s(|{:assoc<list>},:assoc<left>);
06:12 < GLRelia> rakudo-moar 05ce1e: OUTPUT«list»
06:12 <+camelia> rakudo-jvm 5fb81f: OUTPUT«left»
06:12 <+camelia> ..rakudo-moar 5fb81f: OUTPUT«list»
06:16 < [Coke]> when flattening duplicate named args, does the one that gets
picked matter?
06:17 < moritz> [Coke]: iirc the last one wins
--
Will "Coke" Coleda
