Skip to content
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

?(all(1,3,5) ~~ any(1..6)) # False #3461

Closed
p6rt opened this issue Jul 27, 2014 · 4 comments
Closed

?(all(1,3,5) ~~ any(1..6)) # False #3461

p6rt opened this issue Jul 27, 2014 · 4 comments

Comments

@p6rt
Copy link

p6rt commented Jul 27, 2014

Migrated from rt.perl.org#122414 (status was 'rejected')

Searchable as RT122414$

@p6rt
Copy link
Author

p6rt commented Jul 27, 2014

From @dwarring

Consider​:

use v6;
use Test;
ok ?(all(1,3,5) == any(1..6)), 'junctive "=="';
ok ?(all(1,3,5) eq any(1..6)), 'junctive "eq"';
ok ?(all(1,3,5) ~~ any(1..6)), 'junctive "~~"';

Output​:

ok 1 - junctive "=="
ok 2 - junctive "eq"
not ok 3 - junctive "~~"

perl6 version 2014.07-53-g67a13da moarvm, jvm and parrot all fail the third test.

This was encountered in integration/99problems-21-to-30.t

@p6rt
Copy link
Author

p6rt commented Jul 28, 2014

From @dwarring

~~ Doesn't actually autothread. From the IRC

[11​:35] <timotimo> dwarring​: did you see the recent discussion of junctions on the left-hand-side of ~~?
[11​:35] <dwarring> timotimo​: umm no
[11​:35] <dwarring> how recent?
[11​:35] <timotimo> i think we decided that ~~ should not autothread
[11​:36] <timotimo> like, 1 or two days?
[11​:36] <dwarring> right
...
[11​:38] * dwarring backlogging
...
[11​:53] <dwarring> timotimo​: around http://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2014-07-27#i_9087840 to http://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2014-07-27#i_9087839
...
[11​:56] <dwarring> "the choice for ~~ must be driven entirely by the RHS"
...
[11​:58] <dwarring> godd catch timotimo++
[11​:59] <timotimo> yw :)

Will update the 99-problems test and reject this ticket shortly.

On Sun Jul 27 13​:27​:19 2014, david.warring wrote​:

Consider​:

use v6;
use Test;
ok ?(all(1,3,5) == any(1..6)), 'junctive "=="';
ok ?(all(1,3,5) eq any(1..6)), 'junctive "eq"';
ok ?(all(1,3,5) ~~ any(1..6)), 'junctive "~~"';

Output​:

ok 1 - junctive "=="
ok 2 - junctive "eq"
not ok 3 - junctive "~~"

perl6 version 2014.07-53-g67a13da moarvm, jvm and parrot all fail the
third test.

This was encountered in integration/99problems-21-to-30.t

@p6rt
Copy link
Author

p6rt commented Jul 28, 2014

From @dwarring

Closing this ticket, based on #perl6 irc feedback/backlogging. '~~' does LHS does not autothread.

Have replaced with ?(@​numbers (<=) (1..49)) in 99 problems.

On Sun Jul 27 17​:18​:08 2014, david.warring wrote​:

~~ Doesn't actually autothread. From the IRC

[11​:35] <timotimo> dwarring​: did you see the recent discussion of
junctions on the left-hand-side of ~~?
[11​:35] <dwarring> timotimo​: umm no
[11​:35] <dwarring> how recent?
[11​:35] <timotimo> i think we decided that ~~ should not autothread
[11​:36] <timotimo> like, 1 or two days?
[11​:36] <dwarring> right
...
[11​:38] * dwarring backlogging
...
[11​:53] <dwarring> timotimo​: around
http://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2014-07-27#i_9087840 to
http://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2014-07-27#i_9087839
...
[11​:56] <dwarring> "the choice for ~~ must be driven entirely by the
RHS"
...
[11​:58] <dwarring> godd catch timotimo++
[11​:59] <timotimo> yw :)

Will update the 99-problems test and reject this ticket shortly.

On Sun Jul 27 13​:27​:19 2014, david.warring wrote​:

Consider​:

use v6;
use Test;
ok ?(all(1,3,5) == any(1..6)), 'junctive "=="';
ok ?(all(1,3,5) eq any(1..6)), 'junctive "eq"';
ok ?(all(1,3,5) ~~ any(1..6)), 'junctive "~~"';

Output​:

ok 1 - junctive "=="
ok 2 - junctive "eq"
not ok 3 - junctive "~~"

perl6 version 2014.07-53-g67a13da moarvm, jvm and parrot all fail the
third test.

This was encountered in integration/99problems-21-to-30.t

@p6rt
Copy link
Author

p6rt commented Jul 28, 2014

@dwarring - Status changed from 'new' to 'rejected'

@p6rt p6rt closed this as completed Jul 28, 2014
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant