Re: [perl #132283] [REGRESSION] BUILDALL is listed as one of the methods, maybe that's not right (say $foo.^methods)

2017-10-21 Thread Brandon Allbery via RT 
On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Brad Gilbert via RT <
perl6-bugs-follo...@perl.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 08:18:46 -0700, alex.jakime...@gmail.com wrote:
> > https://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6-dev/2017-10-21#i_15334639
> >
> > I' think we should test that both are listed, and we can close the
> > ticket.
> >
>
> I don't think we should force all future implementations to add BUILDALL.
>

Being listed in the methods does not mean part of the spec. I mean, if it
did then .^methods wouldn't be allowed to show user added methods either.
Or did you mean something else here? in which case you need to explain it
better.

-- 
brandon s allbery kf8nh   sine nomine associates
allber...@gmail.com  ballb...@sinenomine.net
unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonadhttp://sinenomine.net

Re: [perl #132283] [REGRESSION] BUILDALL is listed as one of the methods, maybe that's not right (say $foo.^methods)

2017-10-21 Thread Brandon Allbery 
On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Brad Gilbert via RT <
perl6-bugs-follo...@perl.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 08:18:46 -0700, alex.jakime...@gmail.com wrote:
> > https://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6-dev/2017-10-21#i_15334639
> >
> > I' think we should test that both are listed, and we can close the
> > ticket.
> >
>
> I don't think we should force all future implementations to add BUILDALL.
>

Being listed in the methods does not mean part of the spec. I mean, if it
did then .^methods wouldn't be allowed to show user added methods either.
Or did you mean something else here? in which case you need to explain it
better.

-- 
brandon s allbery kf8nh   sine nomine associates
allber...@gmail.com  ballb...@sinenomine.net
unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonadhttp://sinenomine.net

Re: [perl #132283] [REGRESSION] BUILDALL is listed as one of the methods, maybe that's not right (say $foo.^methods)

2017-10-13 Thread Elizabeth Mattijsen via RT 
> On 13 Oct 2017, at 07:52, Aleks-Daniel Jakimenko-Aleksejev (via RT) 
>  wrote:
> 
> # New Ticket Created by  Aleks-Daniel Jakimenko-Aleksejev 
> # Please include the string:  [perl #132283]
> # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. 
> # https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=132283 >
> 
> 
> Code:
> class Foo { has $.bar }; my $f = Foo.new(bar=>'u'); say $f.^methods;
> 
> ¦«2015.12»:
> (bar)
> 
> ¦«2016.06»:
> (bar)
> 
> ¦«2016.12»:
> (bar)
> 
> ¦«2017.06»:
> (bar)
> 
> ¦«f72be0f130cf»:
> (bar BUILDALL)
> 
> 
> 
> Bisectable points at two relevant commits:
> First it was BUILDALL_UNDER_CONSTRUCTION after 
> https://github.com/rakudo/rakudo/commit/9837687d93c907ec232b1c7635776aa0c7faa6bc
> Now it is BUILDALL after 
> https://github.com/rakudo/rakudo/commit/63cf246fd4caa43c52a212054a98e9b450c54127
> 
> 
> I don't know if BUILDALL should be listed or not. My gut feeling says that it 
> shouldn't be, but feel free to argue otherwise. I'm just the messenger.

Well, it *is* an auto-generated method that is installed in the namespace.  
Just like “bar”. So either we should show both, or neither.  Or introduce a 
flag to include/exclude auto-generated methods.  But then we would need to mark 
those methods as auto-generated somehow.

Re: [perl #132283] [REGRESSION] BUILDALL is listed as one of the methods, maybe that's not right (say $foo.^methods)

2017-10-13 Thread Elizabeth Mattijsen 
> On 13 Oct 2017, at 07:52, Aleks-Daniel Jakimenko-Aleksejev (via RT) 
>  wrote:
> 
> # New Ticket Created by  Aleks-Daniel Jakimenko-Aleksejev 
> # Please include the string:  [perl #132283]
> # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. 
> # https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=132283 >
> 
> 
> Code:
> class Foo { has $.bar }; my $f = Foo.new(bar=>'u'); say $f.^methods;
> 
> ¦«2015.12»:
> (bar)
> 
> ¦«2016.06»:
> (bar)
> 
> ¦«2016.12»:
> (bar)
> 
> ¦«2017.06»:
> (bar)
> 
> ¦«f72be0f130cf»:
> (bar BUILDALL)
> 
> 
> 
> Bisectable points at two relevant commits:
> First it was BUILDALL_UNDER_CONSTRUCTION after 
> https://github.com/rakudo/rakudo/commit/9837687d93c907ec232b1c7635776aa0c7faa6bc
> Now it is BUILDALL after 
> https://github.com/rakudo/rakudo/commit/63cf246fd4caa43c52a212054a98e9b450c54127
> 
> 
> I don't know if BUILDALL should be listed or not. My gut feeling says that it 
> shouldn't be, but feel free to argue otherwise. I'm just the messenger.

Well, it *is* an auto-generated method that is installed in the namespace.  
Just like “bar”. So either we should show both, or neither.  Or introduce a 
flag to include/exclude auto-generated methods.  But then we would need to mark 
those methods as auto-generated somehow.