Confusion in documentation of < > about doc

[awwaiid]

Right now these are some nodes like "This is not a real operator, just syntactic sugar that is turned into the { } postcircumfix operator at compile-time." for postcircumfix.< > -- do you think that a similar note for circumfix: < > will suffice?

[AlexDaniel]

@awwaiid I think yes.

[AlexDaniel]

OK, so:

• Postcircumfix: .< > leads to here. It clearly says In most cases, a dot may be placed before a postfix or postcircumfix: (implies that it is not an operator on its own), but then it also says Technically this is not an operator, but syntax special-cased in the compiler.. So no problem here.
• Quote: < > leads to here. Again, I don't think that there's any problem with that.

However, there's now < > in Routine category: https://docs.perl6.org/routine/$LESS-THAN_SIGN%20$GREATER-THAN_SIGN and it says:

The quote-words construct. Breaks up the contents on whitespace, and returns a List of the words. If a word looks like a number literal or a Pair literal, it is converted to the appropriate number.

So at this point the most appropriate title for this ticket is: < > is listed as a circumfix operator, but it is not a real operator. Is that right?

[gfldex]

fixed with 22ddf6d b3dc4f2 2eb85f3