> On 03 Apr 2015, at 14:03, Nicolai Hess <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 2015-04-02 16:06 GMT+02:00 Max Leske <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>>:
> 
>> On 02 Apr 2015, at 00:29, Nicolai Hess <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> 
>> 2015-04-01 18:56 GMT+02:00 Ben Coman <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>>:
>> Issue 14606 [1] is tagged "Really Important" where evaluating....
>> 
>>     | t1 t2 t3 t4 t5 t6 |
>>     t1 := 1.
>>     t2 := 2.
>>     t3 := 3.
>>     t4 := 4. 
>>     t5 := 5 .
>>     t6 := 6.
>>     [    t5 := 50.
>>          t6 := 60.
>>          t3 + t4.
>>          1 halt.
>>     ] value
>> 
>> => can't see the value of t4, t5, t6.
>> 
>> I've just submitted a possible solution for this, but its a bit late before 
>> release for such a change - so I'm asking for "all hands in" to help stress 
>> test it.  You don't need to review code, just please merge latest slice 
>> 14606 into your normal working image and report your experience.
>> 
>> cheers -ben
>> 
>> [1] https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?14606#124466 
>> <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?14606#124466>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Here is a minimal example that does not work with your fix. (condensed from 
>> the failing test case)
>> 
>> [ :x :y | 
>>     (thisContext tempNamed: 'x') inspect.
>>     (1 to: 1)
>>         do: [ :i | 
>>             | k l |
>>             k := y.
>>             l := x.
>>             (thisContext tempNamed: 'x') inspect ] ] value: 1 value: 23
>> 
>> Both inspector windows should show the same value for the argument 'x'. 
>> But the result is 
>> 1. inspector -> 1
>> 2. inspector -> 23
>> 
>> 
> 
> Before loading the slice, both inspectors show ‘1’. That can’t be right 
> either…
> 
> No, that is correct. Both inspector inspect the block argument 'x', it is 
> assigned with value 1
> with the message value:1 value:23
> and the block argument value can not change, therefore both inspect should 
> show ‘1'

Oops. i thought that x was being assigned to in the block :)

>  
> 
> Max

Reply via email to