I am uncertain if I should update my previous node or not.
As I am attacking a seperate portion of this, I believe I
am correct in making a new node.
in reply to Poor Man's Perl6 Exegesis (you get what you pay for)
What does this do? I have been over the related Apocalypse
and Exegesis ( part 3 ) and I think the idea here is to
allow myimport to be called with lists instead of arrays.
sub myimport($exp_from : *@symbols=() : *@options=())
According to TheDamian in
Exegesis 3, page 1, the @ will cause perl6 to expect either
an array or an array reference as the parameter. If we were
to declare a perl6 sub like this:
and called it like this:
sub foo( @bar )
we would generate an error ( at compile time? ).
&foo( "a", "b" );
If we really want foo to be called with a list, we need
to put the flattening star in the sub definition:
sub foo( *@bar )
But, later on in
the same tome, we are told that this will have the
standard perl5 affect of slurping the remainder of the
I am guessing this to be an error on BrentDax's part. I believe
BrentDax was attempting to allow myimport to be called with
lists, but forgot that the flattening star would behave
exactly as we expect from perl5. If I have missed something,
I would really appreciate being corrected.
update: Changed a bit of wording in the last paragraph.