| Geth | rakudo: ugexe++ created pull request #6506: RakuAST: extend lexical lowering to anonymous variables and BEGIN-compiled routines |
01:23 | |
| [Coke] | (this hopefully will also let me do some more work on blin itself since I'm not going to have worry about leaving the box turned on) | 02:51 | |
| ... this seems faster. | 02:55 | ||
| I have half as much memory, but 4 times the cores as the other box. | |||
| gist.github.com/coke/f78decdb75da5...b66731e9db - there's the first blin run on this machine (no new failures yet on main) | 03:55 | ||
|
04:55
Pixi` joined,
ShimmerFairy left
04:56
ShimmerFairy joined
04:58
Pixi left
04:59
Pixi joined
05:00
Pixi` left
|
|||
| ab5tract | Hash.prepend doesn’t make sense to me | 09:13 | |
| It’s not ordered, so how would you prepend? | |||
| Hash.append seems to be broken: | 09:17 | ||
| m: my %h; dd %h.append: :test(66); dd %h | |||
| camelia | {} {} |
||
| lizmat | you need to specify the key *and* one or more values | 09:18 | |
| also: :test(66) is a named arg to append, that will just get eaten | |||
| ab5tract | I did specify a key and a value | 09:19 | |
| And I still hate %_ | |||
| m: my %h; dd %h.append: %( :test(66) ); dd %h | |||
| camelia | {:test(66)} {:test(66)} |
||
| ab5tract | If it isn’t ordered, append should be the same as push which should be the same as unhurt | 09:20 | |
| *unshift | |||
| If they aren’t the same, what on earth are they actually doing differently? | 09:21 | ||
| Do any of these methods actually take a named argument? | |||
| lizmat | nope | 09:22 | |
| m: my %h; %h.push("a",42); dd %h; %h.push("a",666); dd %h | 09:23 | ||
| camelia | {:a(42)} {:a($[42, 666])} |
||
| ab5tract | Then surely it would be better for them to take *%_ as a list of keys and values and not as a (nonexistent) named argument | ||
| lizmat | you're misunderstanding what Hash.push/append do | ||
| m: my %h; %h.push("a",42); dd %h; %h.push("a",[666,777]); dd %h | |||
| camelia | {:a(42)} {:a($[42, [666, 777]])} |
||
| lizmat | m: my %h; %h.push("a",42); dd %h; %h.append("a",[666,777]); dd %h | 09:24 | |
| camelia | {:a(42)} {:a($[42, 666, 777])} |
||
| ab5tract | ah, right your are | ||
| ab5tract scrambles for a hole in the rocks | |||
|
09:28
finanalyst joined
|
|||
| ab5tract | lizmat: after that embarrassing demonstration of my lack of recall, I think it makes sense that we would have prepend and unshift as well | 09:42 | |
| lizmat | well, in the past 14 years of doing raku, yesterday was the first day I could have used it | 09:43 | |
| so it's definitely not a big thing | |||
| but for consistency's sake, it feels like an omission not to have Hash.unshift/prepnd | 09:44 | ||
| *prepend | |||
| ab5tract | Indeed, it feels like an oversight | 09:54 | |
| Geth | rakudo/lizmat-30: 6f266b9cdd | (Elizabeth Mattijsen)++ | src/Raku/Actions.nqp RakuAST: worry about unknown use adverbs in 6.e+ As a result of discussion about 'use' adverbs in github.com/Raku/problem-solving/issues/525 use Test:foo:ver:bar; ok 1; # no worries use v6.e.PREVIEW; use Test:foo:ver:bar; ok 1; Potential difficulties: Detected unsupported adverbs in 'use' statement: :foo:bar |
10:32 | |
| rakudo: lizmat++ created pull request #6508: RakuAST: worry about unknown use adverbs in 6.e+ |
|||
| finanalyst | .tell coleman The docs.raku.org actions seem to have stalled on June 3. The docs site 'about' shows last rendering was June 3 | 12:46 | |
| tellable6 | finanalyst, I'll pass your message to coleman | ||
| lizmat | m: my @fail; for <One Two> { require ::($_); CATCH { @fail.push($_); .resume } }; dd @fail | 15:28 | |
| camelia | Method BOOTException.raku not found in block <unit> at <tmp> line 1 |
||
| lizmat | m: my @fail; for <One Two> { require ::($_); CATCH { @fail.push($_); .resume } }; say @fail | ||
| camelia | [Could not find One in: /home/camelia/.raku /home/camelia/rakudo-m-inst-1/share/perl6/site /home/camelia/rakudo-m-inst-1/share/perl6/vendor /home/camelia/rakudo-m-inst-1/share/perl6/core CompUnit::Repository::AbsolutePath… |
||
| lizmat | m: my @fail; for <One Two> -> $m { require ::($m); CATCH { @fail.push($m); .resume } }; dd @fail | 15:29 | |
| camelia | ["One", "One", "One", "One", "One", "One", "One", "One", "One", "Two", "Two", "Two", "Two", "Two", "Two", "Two", "Two", "Two"] | ||
| lizmat | turns out backtracking through the failed require throws for not meeting the return constraint | 15:31 | |
| for each of the repo objects in the "stack" | |||
| Type check failed for return value; expected CompUnit:D but got BOOTException (BOOTException) | 15:32 | ||
| m: my $seen; require ::("Foo"); CATCH { ++$seen; .resume }; say $seen # golf | 16:34 | ||
| camelia | 9 | ||
| Geth | rakudo/lizmat-31: ccae2d0526 | (Elizabeth Mattijsen)++ | 6 files Remove return constraints from CompUnit::Repos If a "require ::($foo)" failed, then the initial execution error would trigger additional execution errors if .resume was called on it. One for each recursion level in $*REPO. my $s; require ::("Foo"); CATCH { ++$s; .resume }; say $s; # 9 This commit reduces that to 2. Not sure yet where the last additional execution error is coming from. |
16:36 | |
| rakudo: lizmat++ created pull request #6509: Remove return constraints from CompUnit::Repos |
|||
| lizmat | m: my $seen; for <foo bar> -> $m { require ::($m); CATCH { ++$seen; next }; say $seen # golf | 16:41 | |
| camelia | ===SORRY!=== Error while compiling <tmp> Missing block at <tmp>:1 ------> TCH { ++$seen; next }; say $seen # golf<HERE><EOL> expecting any of: postfix statement end statement modifier statement modi… |
||
| lizmat | m: my $seen; for <foo bar> -> $m { require ::($m); CATCH { ++$seen; next } }; say $seen # golf | ||
| camelia | 2 | ||
| lizmat | hmmm.... | 16:42 | |
| ugexe | i thought most exceptions weren't actually resumable | 17:04 | |
| removing those return constraints doesn't seem like the right thing to do regardless | 17:05 | ||
| lizmat | yeah, you're right, I already closed the PR it was adding bandaids instead of fixing the root cause | ||
| ugexe: re github.com/Raku/nqp/pull/854 that doesn't depend on anything in MoarVM, right ? | 17:06 | ||
| ugexe | heh, i don't think so but i've totally forgot about that PR | 17:07 | |
|
17:08
sp1983 joined
|
|||
| ugexe | anything i have created a PR for wouldn't depend on moarvm changes at least | 17:08 | |
| lizmat | ok, well, can't see why the CI turned red, so asked for a re-run | 17:09 | |
| ugexe | i think all nqp ci runs are red | ||
|
17:10
sp1983 left
|
|||
| lizmat | ah, that would explain :-) | 17:10 | |
|
17:10
sp1983 joined
|
|||
| ugexe | yeah, i would have run a make spectest and RAKUDO_RAKUAST=1 make spectest i presume | 17:11 | |
| lizmat | ok, will look into it after the weekly | 17:12 | |
| [Coke] | nqp is red for jvm | 17:13 | |
| if its red on something Moar, thats an issue | 17:14 | ||
| ugexe | moar windows is also red | 17:16 | |
| on main | |||
| lizmat | notable6: weekly | 17:47 | |
| notable6 | lizmat, 7 notes: gist.github.com/8dfbbd296e2fda65d5...c70128e220 | ||
| lizmat | notable6: reset | 18:24 | |
| notable6 | lizmat, No notes for “reset” | ||
| lizmat | notable6: weekly reset | ||
| notable6 | lizmat, Moved existing notes to “weekly_2026-08-03T18:24:09Z” | ||
|
18:29
sp1983 left
|
|||
| lizmat | and yet another Rakudo Weekly News hits the Net: rakudoweekly.blog/2026/08/03/2026-...-language/ | 18:58 | |
| Geth | rakudo: ugexe++ created pull request #6510: Remove bin wrapper scripts on uninstall |
22:33 | |
| rakudo: ugexe++ created pull request #6511: Make explicitly-manage return the managed string |
22:50 | ||
|
23:37
finanalyst left
|
|||