Márton Polgár

I disagree that there is a "simple issue", just like I disagreed at [your related issue](https://github.com/Raku/doc/issues/4096) that I already linked. I thought the revealing explanation from @raiph blew the illusion...

> First, the docs don't need to exactly mirror the Raku**do** implementation – even if Rakudo doesn't define a separate `` decontainerization operator, it _may_ be clearer to describe separate...

I have completely oppositional experience: I didn't need to read the source whatsoever to suspect something is off about this "decont operator" and I would rather spare this confusion from...

@p6steve I think "we are getting there", one way or another. I think you summarized it well (one might nitpick that "zen slice" would rather be the result of subscript...

Funnily enough, up until RakuAST, it worked with `.&EVAL`, just not with `.EVAL`.

I think https://github.com/rakudo/rakudo/issues/1705 and https://github.com/Raku/old-issue-tracker/issues/3475 are actually separate issues - we can accept the current behavior as a solution to the former while refuting it as a solution to the...

@cono one more thing: the sample code itself is a source of confusion. Reduction decreases the dimensions we are working with: `[»+«] [[1, 2, 3], [5, 4, 3]]` is of...

@ab5tract this is not a corner case though. Indeed, reductions on a single item call the single item candidate - _which in this case is `»+«`, not `+`_. The single...

Lizmat told you the short story, let me tell you the little bit longer story about why this happens: the way `...` works is that it has ridiculously low precedence,...

Yall were faster than me. Still, I'm gonna leave this here. https://github.com/Raku/old-issue-tracker/issues/5581 https://github.com/Raku/old-issue-tracker/issues/6442