*Chuckle* One of the first points I made was that instead of fixing the implementation of Lvalue subs, people chant the mantra:

• 1. Don't do that
• 2. If you are going to do that, use a ready made wheel
• 3. If you insist doing it yourself, you will need to tie it which makes it S-L-O-W

If we are going to revert to other wheels, I personally prefer Attribute::Property and even discussed how to overcome some of its limitations. It doesn't fix the fact that a core feature is pretty much unuseable in the current form.

As for getting the rvalue, it's possible but it's not pretty!
Not really. I already mentioned that tying is the last ditch effort in the mantra and I am well aware of how to do it. The trouble is that you are not getting at the rvalue inside the sub which makes tying necessary. The point of the meditation is to spark interest in correcting this deficiency, not more work arounds.

Unfortunately I am not a competent C programmer, but TimToady indicated elsewhere in this thread that he wasn't opposed to the change as long as it was in alignment with p6. And all this time I was assuming the trouble would be with getting it past p5p not the patch itself.