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
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
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
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
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
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 >.
>
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 >.
>
# 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