CartesianIndices gives different answer in Julia 1.6 and 1.5 for particular case

General Usage
1

I just wanted to mention that I have noticed this change in the behavior of CartesianIndices. Which is the expected one, the new or the old?

In Julia 1.5.3

julia> CartesianIndices((2,1:3))
1×3 CartesianIndices{2,Tuple{UnitRange{Int64},UnitRange{Int64}}}:
 CartesianIndex(2, 1)  CartesianIndex(2, 2)  CartesianIndex(2, 3)

In julia 1.6.0

julia> CartesianIndices((2,1:3))
2×3 CartesianIndices{2, Tuple{Base.OneTo{Int64}, UnitRange{Int64}}}:
 CartesianIndex(1, 1)  CartesianIndex(1, 2)  CartesianIndex(1, 3)
 CartesianIndex(2, 1)  CartesianIndex(2, 2)  CartesianIndex(2, 3)
2

Some discussion here CartesianIndices (breaking?) change in 1.6.0-rc1 · Issue #39589 · JuliaLang/julia · GitHub.

Also see the NEWS entry: Add HISTORY.md entry for change noted in #39589 by sostock · Pull Request #39784 · JuliaLang/julia · GitHub.