<masak> m: my $x = 0; say $x ≅ 0 :tolerance(1e-3)
<camelia> rakudo-moar 7a4ca4: OUTPUT«===SORRY!=== Error while
compiling /tmp/Pvx3eWkBNW␤You can't adverb &infix:<≅> [...]
<masak> can't adverb? o rly?
<masak> how do I $x ≅ 0 :tolerance ?
<bartolin> m: my $x = 0; say ($x ≅ 0, :tolerance(1e-3))
<camelia> rakudo-moar 7a4ca4: OUTPUT«(True tolerance => 0.001)␤»
<bartolin> like that?
<bartolin> no, probably not ...
<masak> nope, that's just printing a pair, not passing an adverb.
<masak> I believe I haz found... a bug
* masak .oO( dun dun DUN )
* masak submits rakudobug
I've been looking into this and just got some clarification from TimToady
on expected behaviour for adverbs and chains in general ( http://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2016-06-02#i_12589974). The gist is that
adverbs should be placed at the end of a chain and then distributed to all
the operators in the chain, which will of course make the example in this
ticket "just work".