From paul@liekut.de

It seems that although qqw{} and << >> are equivalent

my $a = 42;
<<$a b c>>.perl; # ("42", "b", "c")
qqw{$a b c}.perl; # ("42", "b", "c")

they don't always behave the same. For instance​:

my $a = 42; say <<$a b c>>; # 42bc
my $a = 42; say qqw{$a b c}; # 42 b c

moritz++ used this on IRC​:
sub f(*@​a) { say @​a.elems }; my $a = 42; f «$a b c»; f qqw{$a b c}
OUTPUT«3␤3␤»

multi f(*@​a) { say @​a.elems }; multi f($one) { say 'one'}; f «b c»; f qqw{b c}
OUTPUT«2␤one␤»

and showed that the quoting constructs differ when there is a single-element multi candidate available.

One would expect that these two constructs should behave in the same manner.

From @Mouq

Actually, it's qqww{} and << >> that are supposed to be equivalent. And they are when it comes to capture context​:

$ perl6 -e'my $a = 42; say <<$a b c>>;'
42bc
$ perl6 -e'my $a = 42; say qqww{$a b c};'
42bc
$ perl6 -e'my $a = 42; say qqw{$a b c};'
42 b c

It's less misleading to say that qqww{} and qqw{} don't flatten the same.

On Thu Feb 12 04​:25​:15 2015, pcoch wrote​:

It seems that although qqw{} and << >> are equivalent

my $a = 42;
<<$a b c>>.perl; # ("42", "b", "c")
qqw{$a b c}.perl; # ("42", "b", "c")

they don't always behave the same. For instance​:

my $a = 42; say <<$a b c>>; # 42bc
my $a = 42; say qqw{$a b c}; # 42 b c

moritz++ used this on IRC​:
sub f(*@​a) { say @​a.elems }; my $a = 42; f «$a b c»; f qqw{$a b c}
OUTPUT«3␤3␤»

multi f(*@​a) { say @​a.elems }; multi f($one) { say 'one'}; f «b c»; f
qqw{b c}
OUTPUT«2␤one␤»

and showed that the quoting constructs differ when there is a single-
element multi candidate available.

One would expect that these two constructs should behave in the same
manner.

The RT System itself - Status changed from 'new' to 'open'

From @coke

On Sun Mar 01 15​:24​:23 2015, Mouq wrote​:

Actually, it's qqww{} and << >> that are supposed to be equivalent.
And they are when it comes to capture context​:

$ perl6 -e'my $a = 42; say <<$a b c>>;'
42bc
$ perl6 -e'my $a = 42; say qqww{$a b c};'
42bc
$ perl6 -e'my $a = 42; say qqw{$a b c};'
42 b c

It's less misleading to say that qqww{} and qqw{} don't flatten the
same.

On Thu Feb 12 04​:25​:15 2015, pcoch wrote​:

It seems that although qqw{} and << >> are equivalent

my $a = 42;
<<$a b c>>.perl; # ("42", "b", "c")
qqw{$a b c}.perl; # ("42", "b", "c")

they don't always behave the same. For instance​:

my $a = 42; say <<$a b c>>; # 42bc
my $a = 42; say qqw{$a b c}; # 42 b c

moritz++ used this on IRC​:
sub f(*@​a) { say @​a.elems }; my $a = 42; f «$a b c»; f qqw{$a b c}
OUTPUT«3␤3␤»

multi f(*@​a) { say @​a.elems }; multi f($one) { say 'one'}; f «b c»; f
qqw{b c}
OUTPUT«2␤one␤»

and showed that the quoting constructs differ when there is a single-
element multi candidate available.

One would expect that these two constructs should behave in the same
manner.

Current situation​:

15​:20 < jnthn> m​: my $a = 42; say <<$a b c>>;
15​:20 <+camelia> rakudo-moar 7c6a55​: OUTPUT«(42 b c)␤»
15​:21 < jnthn> m​: my $a = 42; say qqww{$a b c};
15​:21 <+camelia> rakudo-moar 7c6a55​: OUTPUT«(42 b c)␤»
15​:21 < jnthn> m​: my $a = 42; say qqw{$a b c};
15​:21 <+camelia> rakudo-moar 7c6a55​: OUTPUT«[42 b c]␤»

15​:21 < jnthn> m​: my $a = 42; say .WHAT for <<$a b c>>, qqww{$a b c}, qqw{$a b
  c}
15​:21 <+camelia> rakudo-moar 7c6a55​: OUTPUT«(List)␤(List)␤(Array)␤»
15​:22 < jnthn> [Coke]​: Bit dubious that the last one is Array, not List too
15​:22 < [Coke]> I'll add that to the ticket. Thanks.

--
Will "Coke" Coleda

From @jnthn

On Tue Nov 17 12​:23​:28 2015, coke wrote​:

Current situation​:

15​:20 < jnthn> m​: my $a = 42; say <<$a b c>>;
15​:20 <+camelia> rakudo-moar 7c6a55​: OUTPUT«(42 b c)␤»
15​:21 < jnthn> m​: my $a = 42; say qqww{$a b c};
15​:21 <+camelia> rakudo-moar 7c6a55​: OUTPUT«(42 b c)␤»
15​:21 < jnthn> m​: my $a = 42; say qqw{$a b c};
15​:21 <+camelia> rakudo-moar 7c6a55​: OUTPUT«[42 b c]␤»

15​:21 < jnthn> m​: my $a = 42; say .WHAT for <<$a b c>>, qqww{$a b c},
qqw{$a b
c}
15​:21 <+camelia> rakudo-moar 7c6a55​: OUTPUT«(List)␤(List)␤(Array)␤»
15​:22 < jnthn> [Coke]​: Bit dubious that the last one is Array, not
List too
15​:22 < [Coke]> I'll add that to the ticket. Thanks.

Corrected that one that accidentally returned Array; tests in S02-literals/quoting.t.

@jnthn - Status changed from 'open' to 'resolved'