>myfunc: func [][
> localvar:: $25
> myinnerfunc: func [][
> innerlocal:: $10
> print localvar ; prints $25
> ]
> print innerlocal; error!
> ]
> print localvar ; error!
>
> using the "::" for local var will make it more
> convienient to create local vars (which i use all the
> time over global vars). In addition, it will help
> prevent some errors of accidental global var creation
> because it is now easy to spot a local var. Best of
You can already do something like:
myfunc: func [][
context [
localvar: $25
myinnerfunc: func [][
context [
innerlocal: $10
print localvar ; prints $25
]
]
print innerlocal; error!
]
]
print localvar ; error!
---
Ciao
Romano
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rishi Oswal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 5:08 AM
Subject: [REBOL] local vars in functions
> One part of REBOL that can feel odd is when i have to
> define local variables of a function in the first
> block of the function. I find it a bit annoying to
> have to add new variables to the list for every little
> local variable I use. In addition, I feel it clutters
> up the first block and increases function size. In
> addition, the way it is currently done could make it
> easy to create hard to detect bugs.
>
> What I would like to see is another shortcut to
> creating local variables in any context (function,
> innerfunction, loop). The obvious way I see of doing
> this is as follows:
>
>
> myfunc: func [][
> localvar:: $25
> myinnerfunc: func [][
> innerlocal:: $10
> print localvar ; prints $25
> ]
> print innerlocal; error!
> ]
> print localvar ; error!
>
> using the "::" for local var will make it more
> convienient to create local vars (which i use all the
> time over global vars). In addition, it will help
> prevent some errors of accidental global var creation
> because it is now easy to spot a local var. Best of
> all, this type of shortcut would not break anything in
> rebol. You could even use this in a loop:
>
> for count 1 10 1 [
> localvar:: "hello"
> ]
>
> Using the "::" shortcut in a global context would be
> the same as using a ":".
>
> The disadvantage I see is that it adds another thing
> to the language.. But consider that now we could stop
> using the /local keyword, reduce bugs, and use it
> consistently everywhere, overall it can simplify
> things.
>
> Anybody have other reasons as to why it was not done
> this way??
>
> Perhaps there is a performance issue??
>
> rishi
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more
> http://games.yahoo.com/
> --
> 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.
