On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 8:46 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Martin Rubey writes:
> |
> | (2)
> | for i in 1..5 repeat
> | j: Integer := i^2
> | output(i::OutputForm)$OutputPackage
> |
> | output(j::OutputForm)$OutputPackage
> |
> | (the scope of the variable j is restricted to the loop)
> |
> | ... I really like that (1) produces an error, but I really
> | dislike that (2) does, too...
>
> Why?
>
Perhaps it is not clear to Martin that "well-written" SPAD code should
look like this?
j: Integer
for i in 1..5 repeat
j := i^2
output(i::OutputForm)$OutputPackage
output(j::OutputForm)$OutputPackage
with j defined in the scope where it is used. See:
http://axiom-wiki.newsynthesis.org/SandBoxLexicalScope
> |
> | Any chance of changing this?
> |
I think Gaby's change to require the definition to occur in the proper
scope is a good one.
Regards,
Bill Page.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100.
Use priority code J8TL2D2.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
_______________________________________________
open-axiom-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open-axiom-devel
