[perl #131695] Confusion in precedence with <<$foo>>[0]

2017-07-03 Thread Aleks-Daniel Jakimenko-Aleksejev via RT
I don't really want to start another ticket for what I'm about to suggest, therefore I'll reopen this one. Not so long ago I filed this ticket: https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=131640 The underlying issue is exactly the same. And it has actually happened during whateverable

Re: [perl #131695] Confusion in precedence with <<$foo>>[0]

2017-07-03 Thread Brandon Allbery via RT
Perhaps this example should be provided somewhere as a 'gotcha'. On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 11:09 AM, jn...@jnthn.net via RT < perl6-bugs-follo...@perl.org> wrote: > On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 05:46:46 -0700, comdog wrote: > > It seems that term precedence with << >> gets confused. > > > The << >> quoting

Re: [perl #131695] Confusion in precedence with <<$foo>>[0]

2017-07-03 Thread Brandon Allbery
Perhaps this example should be provided somewhere as a 'gotcha'. On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 11:09 AM, jn...@jnthn.net via RT < perl6-bugs-follo...@perl.org> wrote: > On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 05:46:46 -0700, comdog wrote: > > It seems that term precedence with << >> gets confused. > > > The << >> quoting

Re: [perl #131695] Confusion in precedence with <<$foo>>[0]

2017-07-03 Thread brian d foy via RT
On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 11:09 AM, jn...@jnthn.net via RT wrote: > I can see the potential for a human reader to be confused, I think there are two improvements here: * a better explanation of interpolation and what's allowed there (such as "only postfix...") with

Re: [perl #131695] Confusion in precedence with <<$foo>>[0]

2017-07-03 Thread brian d foy
On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 11:09 AM, jn...@jnthn.net via RT wrote: > I can see the potential for a human reader to be confused, I think there are two improvements here: * a better explanation of interpolation and what's allowed there (such as "only postfix...") with

[perl #131695] Confusion in precedence with <<$foo>>[0]

2017-07-03 Thread jn...@jnthn.net via RT
On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 05:46:46 -0700, comdog wrote: > It seems that term precedence with << >> gets confused. > The << >> quoting construct interpolates. The rule for interpolation of method calls, indexing, etc. after a scalar is that there may be one, but it may only end with a ], ), } or >. >

[perl #131695] Confusion in precedence with <<$foo>>[0]

2017-07-03 Thread jn...@jnthn.net via RT
On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 05:46:46 -0700, comdog wrote: > It seems that term precedence with << >> gets confused. > The << >> quoting construct interpolates. The rule for interpolation of method calls, indexing, etc. after a scalar is that there may be one, but it may only end with a ], ), } or >. >

[perl #131695] Confusion in precedence with <<$foo>>[0]

2017-07-03 Thread brian d foy
# New Ticket Created by "brian d foy" # Please include the string: [perl #131695] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=131695 > It seems that term precedence with << >> gets confused. I also asked this on