Ok I got it. Sorry, I was a bit confused. Thank you :)
On Monday, December 8, 2014 1:28:47 PM UTC+1, Stefan Karpinski wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 3:24 AM, <ele...@gmail.com <javascript:>> wrote: > >> >> >> On Monday, December 8, 2014 6:15:37 PM UTC+10, remi....@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>> Thank you for the explanation Stefan. >>> But isn't it possible to just consider the scopes declared inside of a >>> function + the global scope while looking for a variable definition? I find >>> the fact that the variable can come from the scope in which the function is >>> called strange. >>> >> >> It can come from the scope in which the function is defined, not the >> scope in which it is called, see >> http://docs.julialang.org/en/latest/manual/variables-and-scoping/#scope-of-variables >> >> Cheers >> Lex >> > > Yes, variables can only come from the scope where the function is defined, > not where it is called – that is lexical scoping. Allowing variables to > come from the calling scope is dynamic scoping, which has generally fallen > out of favor in modern programming languages because it makes it impossible > to reason locally about the meaning of code. >
