Hi, Mark > Surely this is incorrect? > > >> a: has [b c] [ print b print c] > >> a > none > none > >> a/local 3 4 > 3 > 4
Amazing! At least for me! This demostrates that /local is a refinement like any other, only for convention it is used for defining local. One can use another one. The only difference is that at least Help is aware of the convention about local and does not put /local about user refinements. There is no difference between: a1: has [b c] [ print b print c] a2: func [/k b c] [ print b print c] a1 a2 a1/local 2 3 a2/k 2 3 --- Ciao Romano > > Surely local words default value should be unset > until they are defined? > > Also in the second case is it correct to be > able to pass values to local words in this manner? > > How is the above different from this.... > > >> use [b c] [print b print c] > ** Script Error: b has no value > ** Near: print b print c > > Can somebody please explain the wisdom of this > or is it a bug? > > cheers, > > Mark Dickson > -- > To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the > subject, without the quotes. > -- To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the subject, without the quotes.
