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
Changed behavior after v6.c: using “last” inside “grep” (say ^∞ .grep: { last }) #5329
Comments
From @AlexDanielCode: Result (2016.01): Result (HEAD): Coke++ has managed to find (git bisect) commit that caused this problem: rakudo/rakudo@6d120ca I don't know which behavior is right. However, take a look at the next example: Code: Result (2016.01): In other words, even previous behavior was not �right� in all cases. |
From @cokeOn Wed May 18 14:21:32 2016, alex.jakimenko@gmail.com wrote:
I actually found the difference of a similar but not quite exactly the same piece of code; However there is a very good chance this is still the commit responsible. -- |
From @AlexDanielFrom outdated design docs: OK, so 「last」 in grep is supposed to work. And it did� Code: Result (2016.02): Result (HEAD): Bisectable points to rakudo/rakudo@6d120ca |
From @lizmatPreliminary fix for 2016.12 made in 7021861705f03b105d . Proper fix will happen after the release. Tests are still needed.
|
The RT System itself - Status changed from 'new' to 'open' |
From @moritzThere's now a test for last in grep on an infinite list: Raku/roast@9b1a7cb528 As you see in the context of this diff, there was a test for last in grep already, though on a finite list. Liz, you mentioned a proper fix forthcoming. Should I keep this ticket open until the proper fix is in? |
1 similar comment
From @moritzThere's now a test for last in grep on an infinite list: Raku/roast@9b1a7cb528 As you see in the context of this diff, there was a test for last in grep already, though on a finite list. Liz, you mentioned a proper fix forthcoming. Should I keep this ticket open until the proper fix is in? |
From @lizmatThe proper fix was even committed before the last release, so yes this ticket can be closed as far as I�m concerned. moritz++
|
@zoffixznet - Status changed from 'open' to 'resolved' |
From @AlexDanielRT #130365 was actually a dup of this ticket. Therefore, this can be closed. On 2016-05-19 08:20:38, coke wrote:
|
@AlexDaniel - Status changed from 'new' to 'resolved' |
Migrated from rt.perl.org#128181 (status was 'resolved')
Searchable as RT128181$
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: