On 27 May 2003 at 17:27, Simon Cozens wrote: > Matthias Bauer: > > It seems as if the array created to hold the > > returned AV of ''reverse 0..5`` is somehow > > re--used in later invocations of blah(). > > That's precisely what's going on. > > > Bug or feature or programming error? > > I'd say it was undefined behaviour.
I know that this isn't 'fun', but why would you call it 'undefined' rather than a bug? Shouldn't "reverse 0..5" *always* get you a list "5,4,3,2,1"? /Bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <--
