From @masak

<masak> actually, I see another bug there... :)
<masak> rakudo​: say log(1, 10)
<p6eval> rakudo 70bfd5​: OUTPUT«too many arguments passed (2) - 1
params expected [...]
<masak> I don't know about you, but '1 params' does not make an
awesome message...
* masak submits a rakudobug about that

See what the standard of 'awesome error messages' is doing to us? But
I do think English grammar mandates "param" when it's only 1
parameter. :)

From @kyleha

On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 4​:50 PM, Carl Mäsak<perl6-bugs-followup@​perl.org> wrote​:

<p6eval> rakudo 70bfd5​: OUTPUT«too many arguments passed (2) - 1
params expected [...]

In this case, it might be easiest to leave the word out​:

Too many arguments passed (2) - 1 expected.

Even this looks not too bad to me​:

Too many arguments passed (1) - 0 expected.

Kyle.

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

From @chromatic

On Wednesday 08 July 2009 14​:56​:11 Kyle Hasselbacher wrote​:

In this case, it might be easiest to leave the word out​:

Too many arguments passed (2) - 1 expected.

Even this looks not too bad to me​:

Too many arguments passed (1) - 0 expected.

It's Parrot behavior. It's trivial to change to "Too many params passed" or
"Too many results passed". Would that be clearer?

-- c

From @masak

chromatic (>), Kyle (>>)​:

In this case, it might be easiest to leave the word out​:

Too many arguments passed (2) - 1 expected.

Even this looks not too bad to me​:

Too many arguments passed (1) - 0 expected.

It's Parrot behavior.  It's trivial to change to "Too many params passed" or
"Too many results passed".  Would that be clearer?

Maybe, but the problem as described in the original ticket was the
inconsistency of '1' and 'params' with an 's'.

// Carl

From not.com@gmail.com

On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 3​:28 PM, Carl Mäsak<cmasak@​gmail.com> wrote​:

It's Parrot behavior.  It's trivial to change to "Too many params passed" or
"Too many results passed".  Would that be clearer?

Maybe, but the problem as described in the original ticket was the
inconsistency of '1' and 'params' with an 's'.

There's also the inconsistency of "arguments" vs "params"! Drop the
"params" altogether.

From @mathw

On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 1​:24 AM, yary<not.com@​gmail.com> wrote​:

On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 3​:28 PM, Carl Mäsak<cmasak@​gmail.com> wrote​:

It's Parrot behavior.  It's trivial to change to "Too many params passed" or
"Too many results passed".  Would that be clearer?

Maybe, but the problem as described in the original ticket was the
inconsistency of '1' and 'params' with an 's'.

There's also the inconsistency of "arguments" vs "params"! Drop the
"params" altogether.

There's also also the fact that 'param' is an abbreviation and looks
sloppy, so it should be 'parameter' vs 'argument'. Which is right? I
don't know, but I know that 'param' is wrong. PIR might use it, but
that's not the kind of thing we want to expose in error messages.

Or at least, I don't.

From @chromatic

On Wednesday 08 July 2009 17​:24​:47 yary wrote​:

On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 3​:28 PM, Carl Mäsak<cmasak@​gmail.com> wrote​:

Maybe, but the problem as described in the original ticket was the
inconsistency of '1' and 'params' with an 's'.

There's also the inconsistency of "arguments" vs "params"! Drop the
"params" altogether.

I declare that "beyond the scope of this ticket", which I have resolved as of
Parrot r39964.

-- c

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