On 10 Apr 2011, at 11:39 AM, Ken Thomases wrote:
>> I am grateful you called this to my attention, as I had been thinking that
>> blocks were closures, in which referencing (but not, usefully, changing)
>> stack-local variables would work.
>
> Blocks are closures and referencing stack-local variables does work. For
> non-__block variables, the block has a const copy of the value, just as
> though it were passed by value into a function.
>
>> I'd been thrown by the existence of the __block attribute, which permits
>> referencing a stack-local variable as an lvalue. I had reasoned that if a
>> __block variable _is_ obviously a reference to that memory, a non-__block
>> variable (whose value does _not_ propagate to the stack variable when a
>> block changes it) obviously _couldn't_ be a reference.
>
> You had been correct. Kyle just confused you.
Your response is very clear, and my mind is at ease. Thank you.
— F
_______________________________________________
Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com)
Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
