|
03:23
kjp left
03:24
kjp joined
|
|||
| ShimmerFairy | I think I've got an idea on why /[b+?]:/ seems to ignore the ratcheting, by the way. | 04:38 | |
| m: my regex subrule { b+? }; my $test = "abbbc"; say $test ~~ $_ for (/a [b+?]: c/, /a (b+?): c/, /a [b+? | <!>]: c/, /a <&subrule>: c/, /a [<&subrule>]: c/); | |||
| camelia | ｢abbbc｣ Nil Nil Nil ｢abbbc｣ |
||
| ShimmerFairy | It seems that the [] grouping construct doesn't really exist as an atom all its own, unless it's used to define an alternation. So for alternating []s, the ratchet gets applied to that alternation, but for all the other []s, the ratchet disappears at some point in the process, along with the brackets they attached to. | 04:39 | |
| It reminds me of the difference between $<capture>=[stuff] and $<capture>=(stuff), but I'm not sure if the way ratchet is handled here makes the most sense. You could argue that [a b c]: ought to let you have "scoped" ratcheting changes, i.e. be a synonym for [:r a b c]. | 04:44 | ||
| I wonder if you could argue for the opposite, that [] brackets are supposed to "melt away" very quickly in every case, and that having it affect things like [ad | ade]: is the real mistake. (Again, the big issue here is that how backtracking mods work with non-quantifiers was never detailed.) | 05:22 | ||
|
05:22
SabeDoesThings joined,
SabeDoesThings left
|
|||
| ShimmerFairy | Oh that's fun, Exegesis 5 explicitly talks about "frugal ratcheting" (as I've taken to calling it), and apparently back in the day /a+? : b/ was expected to enable such a thing (treating ':' as an atom on its own rather than a postfix modifier; would explain why it looks like the atoms :: and :::) | 11:40 | |
| [Coke] | ok, I will not have any time this morning, as it turns out, so I will be working on the release late afternoon Eastern. | 12:14 | |
|
13:06
librasteve_ joined
13:45
Geth left,
Geth joined
14:56
Pixi left
15:03
Pixi joined
|
|||
| [Coke] | timo: I don't see a PR from you - do I need to wait? | 18:00 | |
| releasable6__: next | |||
| releasable6__ | [Coke], Next release is just a few moments away. There are no known blockers. 47 out of 47 commits logged | ||
| timo | ah, i didn't hear a yes or no answer if i should | 18:10 | |
| I can make it real quick though, just need to kick out some debug printfs | |||
| Geth | rakudo/release-2026.03: cc7abaa72e | (Will Coleda)++ | 3 files Update changelog + announcement Deliberately not logged: [163acc85][0fac56e2][eef0e946][5cf4368e][640239dc][14eabf1e] |
18:32 | |
| [Coke] | nearly done with moarvm but man these CI checks are slow | 19:23 | |
| want to see at least one green before pushing merge. :) | 19:24 | ||
| timo | fair. | 19:27 | |
| [Coke] | moarvm release done | 19:38 | |
| timo | nice! | 19:55 | |
| [Coke] | might be some 6.c/6.d test failures | 20:19 | |
| gist.github.com/coke/593b7446e2719...18c5864201 | 20:20 | ||
| running d now | |||
| updated. d was fine, c had 2 failures | 20:27 | ||
| there were some changes on master but not those 2 files | 20:29 | ||
| lizmat: t/spec/S32-io/open.t is failing on 6.c-errata, and it's a '-' related IO test. | 20:38 | ||
| it's "just" complaining about the deprecation there. | 20:40 | ||
| I don't think this is a release blocker given that it's just that, but I'll open a ticket on roast. | 20:41 | ||
| lizmat: why is github.com/Raku/roast/issues/881 re-opened? | 20:42 | ||
| also: github.com/Raku/roast/issues/878 was never closed? | |||
| (I thought I worked on that one) | 20:43 | ||
| Geth | rakudo/release-2026.03: 0d99b207f1 | (Will Coleda)++ | tools/templates/NQP_REVISION [release] Bump NQP revision to 2026.03 |
20:54 | |
| rakudo/release-2026.03: ad13c5f702 | (Will Coleda)++ | VERSION [release] Bump VERSION to 2026.03 |
|||
| nqp/main: 586cc7838a | (Will Coleda)++ | tools/templates/MOAR_REVISION [release] Bump MoarVM revision to 2026.03 |
|||
| nqp/main: 3e5b62ef76 | (Will Coleda)++ | VERSION [release] Bump VERSION to 2026.03 |
|||
| rakudo: coke++ created pull request #6101: Release 2026.03 |
21:13 | ||
| rakudo/main: 4 commits pushed by (Will Coleda)++ | 21:14 | ||
| [Coke] | .... my github token also expired. cannot win today | 21:23 | |
| .tell patrickb 2026.03 is ready for binary releases. | 21:26 | ||
| tellable6 | [Coke], I'll pass your message to patrickb | ||
| [Coke] | .tell el_che 2026.03 is ready for binary releases. | ||
| tellable6 | [Coke], I'll pass your message to El_Che | ||
| [Coke] | Release is done. | 21:31 | |
| Please give a check, I'll be back online in a while in case something explodes. | 21:32 | ||
| japhb | [Coke]++ # Thanks again! :-) | 21:40 | |