Vadim Belman
Vadim Belman
I would rather consider prohibiting declarations of `v` variable because it is a reserved syntax. But a test with `if` reveals that it works. Though context matters in this case...
Probably, you're right. Lexicality gives it more sense.
@jonathanstowe I'm not really against removing these lines, but if memory serves me right, some editors recognizes the format to determine filetype. So, it could be useful sometimes. Removal would...
I have done some investigation into this issue and have a note which might rather be useful for RakuAST development. Especially taking into account a recent [message about `BEGIN`](https://irclogs.raku.org/moarvm/2022-06-05.html#13:55) from...
Speaking of the general correctness of the approach to implement this compiler-dependent code, I don't think it would work correctly anyway. `EVAL` effectively creates a lexical scope. So, `pack` imported...
Suspended, awaiting for Raku/problem-solving#299
This has to be a 6.e change because otherwise we would need to change 6.c/d specs. I'd be fine with the change if none of the ecosystem modules are broken....
No. There must be a way to provide a "patched" version of class for each language version. I don't see a reason why same core object would behave differently being...
There is no way for the parser to know what `RX` means exactly in the expression. Guessing is no good too. For this reason there is `R[X]` syntax.
I don't remember exactly why, and not ready to analyze the grammar, but what pops out of my memory is that there is an ambiguity possible.