> The whole concept of local and global variables is to deal
> with assigning the same name both locally and globally.
Not within a single definition. If you did that, you'd only be able to access
the value of one "flavor" (in J, the local name).
For example:
NB. Run this in J5 ('cause J6 will
NB. produce errors, which is the
NB. topic of this thread)
9!:14''
j504/2005-03-30/13:35
useful =: verb define
a =. '' NB. Local
for_i. i.-#y. do.
a =. a , i{y. NB. Local
end.
a
)
useless =: verb define
a =. '' NB. Local
for_i. i.-#y. do.
a =: a , i{y. NB. Global
end.
a
)
useful ;:'reverse me, please'
+------+-+--+-------+
|please|,|me|reverse|
+------+-+--+-------+
useless ;:'not what I expected'
a
+---+
|not|
+---+
Does this clarify? If not, then maybe an argument in English: local and global
variables serve different purposes. Global names
are for state persistance and information sharing, whereas the local names are
for code clarity (and efficency, sometimes).
Assigning both flavors of a name in the same definition is most likely an
oversight.
If you're still not convinced, then maybe I misunderstood you. If so, can you
provide an example where you need to assign the
same name both locally and globally within a single definition?
-Dan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
