Should this be valid in perl 6?

[Yiyi Hu]

Indirect object notation now requires a colon after the invocant if
there are any arguments. If there are no arguments and you omit the
colon, the notation is parsed either as a named unary operator or a
list operator with one argument. In any case, all of these come out to
the same thing:

$handle.close
close($handle)
close $handle:
close $handle

From Synoposis, It's said that the last example( close $handle )
should be valid.
But in pugs, It isn't.

class TMP { method tmp { "Hello".say}; }; my TMP $t .= new;
tmp $t;

So, I wonder, If perl 6 will allow "tmp $t;"

Thanks,
Xinming

[Autrijus Tang]

On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 03:03:39PM +0800, Yiyi Hu wrote:
> $handle.close
> close($handle)
> close $handle:
> close $handle
>
> >From Synoposis, It's said that the last example( close $handle )
> should be valid.
> But in pugs, It isn't.
>
> class TMP { method tmp { "Hello".say}; }; my TMP $t .= new;
> tmp $t;
>
> So, I wonder, If perl 6 will allow "tmp $t;"

Hm, I think that's a case of a unimplemented special case.

I have just sent you a committer invitation; please write it up as a
test in t/syntax/ and commit the new test.

Thanks!
/Autrijus/

[Autrijus Tang]

On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 12:42:31AM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
> > class TMP { method tmp { "Hello".say}; }; my TMP $t .= new;
> > tmp $t;
> >
> > So, I wonder, If perl 6 will allow "tmp $t;"
>
> Hm, I think that's a case of a unimplemented special case.
>
> I have just sent you a committer invitation; please write it up as a
> test in t/syntax/ and commit the new test.

Fixed as r6286. Please still commit the test, and add your
(ideographic?) name to AUTHORS.

Thanks,
/Autrijus/