New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
is assoc('list') gives "MVMArray: Can't pop from an empty array" #6173
Comments
From @zoffixznetOn prefix and postfix ops, using `is assoc('list')` causes an LTA error without any location. I've no idea if it makes sense for them to be assoc list; originally, I came across this while trying to make a postfix op `is equiv(&[orelse])`: $ perl6 -e 'sub prefix:<♥> ($) is prec({:assoc("list")}) { }; ♥42' The error points to at gen/moar/stage2/NQPHLL.nqp:1099 (/home/zoffix/.rakudobrew/moar-nom/install/share/nqp/lib/NQPHLL.moarvm:EXPR_reduce) However, I don't know if this should be fixed by throwing when attempting to is assoc list these types of ops or what... |
From @zoffixznetOn Tue, 04 Apr 2017 11:05:05 -0700, cpan@zoffix.com wrote:
This is partially fixed now for `is equiv` with rakudo/rakudo@f9f0883c6c and Raku/roast@75f42755ec Per TimToady[^1], we should throw on attempts to use list assoc with non-infix ops. It's a trivial thing to do with normal code, but because a lot of the setting isn't available in traits, it kept giving me compilation issues. There's one way that works, but in that method the check is done AFTER altering the prec (with .prec('assoc') eq... check), which IMO is LTA. I ended up hacking an nqp way with nqp::atkey(%spec) working, but then crashing with `:prec(:assoc<list>)` usage. So, It gave me a compilation error the 100th time today, so I stashed it and will give it another try another day; unless someone else beats me to it. [1] https://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6-dev/2017-04-04#i_14375115 |
From @zoffixznetOn Tue, 04 Apr 2017 15:42:50 -0700, cpan@zoffix.com wrote:
From: https://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6-dev/2018-01-12#i_15683344 14:16 masak re https://rt.perl.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=132711 -- associativity *does* make sense for prefix ops. see S03 for the whole scoop |
From @zoffixznet
FYI: with 6.d prep going on, I reverted[^1] that test for now Don't want to spec the test's behaviour until this ticket and [1] Raku/roast@b9c2a956e1dbfe39603 |
Migrated from rt.perl.org#131099 (status was 'new')
Searchable as RT131099$
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: